NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / August 8, 2021 / The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that class actions have commenced on behalf of certain shareholders in the following companies. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you.

Didi Global Inc. F/K/A Xiaoju Kuaizhi Inc. (NYSE:DIDI)

If you suffered a loss, contact us at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/didi-global-inc-f-k-a-xiaoju-kuaizhi-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=18330&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 7, 2021
This lawsuit is on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired DiDi: (a) American Depositary Shares pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's June 2021 initial public offering; and/or (b) securities between June 30, 2021 and July 21, 2021, inclusive.

Allegations against DIDI include that: (1) DiDi's apps did not comply with applicable laws and regulations governing privacy protection and the collection of personal information; (2) as a result, the Company was reasonably likely to incur scrutiny from the Cyberspace Administration of China; (3) the CAC had already warned DiDi to delay its IPO to conduct a self-examination of its network security; (4) as a result of the foregoing, DiDi's apps were reasonably likely to be taken down from app stores in China, which would have an adverse effect on its financial results and operations; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

CorMedix Inc. (NASDAQ:CRMD)

If you suffered a loss, contact us at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/cormedix-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=18330&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: September 20, 2021
Class Period: July 8, 2020 - May 13, 2021

Allegations against CRMD include that: (i) deficiencies existed with respect to an investigational drug product, DefenCath's, manufacturing process and/or at the facility responsible for manufacturing DefenCath; (ii) in light of the foregoing deficiencies, the Food and Drug Administration was unlikely to approve the DefenCath new drug application for catheter-related bloodstream infections in its present form; (iii) Defendants had downplayed the true scope of the deficiencies with DefenCath's manufacturing process and/or at the facility responsible for manufacturing DefenCath; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.