Datavault AI (NASDAQ: DVLT) Securities Class Action: Expanded Class Period and October 5, 2026 Lead Plaintiff Deadline

The lawsuit alleges that Datavault AI and certain executives made materially false or misleading statements concerning several aspects of the company's business over an extended period.

The complaint focuses on allegations concerning:

• the economic value of corporate partnerships;
• activity on the Datavault Platform;
• commercialization of the company's technology;
• liquidity and working capital;
• Datavault's $200 million 2026 revenue target;
• anticipated non-dilutive financing;
• company affiliations and executive background; and
• Datavault's ability to continue as a going concern.

Unlike a case built on a single misstatement and one stock drop, this complaint identifies multiple alleged corrective disclosures between October 2025 and August 2026. These allegations have not been proven.

At the beginning of the alleged class period, Datavault AI was known as WiSA Technologies and traded under the ticker WISA. On September 4, 2024, WiSA announced an agreement to acquire intellectual property from Data Vault Holdings Inc. — including the Datavault Platform — for approximately $210 million.

The company later changed its name to Datavault AI (February 2025) and now trades under DVLT. It is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Philadelphia. Investors who purchased WISA during the earlier part of the class period should not assume the lawsuit concerns only purchases made after the DVLT name change.

In connection with the acquisition, the company announced that Nathaniel Bradley would become CEO and promoted his experience commercializing intellectual property. The complaint alleges that defendants did not disclose a prior SEC civil proceeding involving Parallax Health Sciences; the SEC had alleged misleading disclosures, and Bradley resolved that matter without admitting or denying the allegations, paid a civil penalty, and became subject to a temporary penny-stock bar.

Datavault has described its platform as technology through which organizations can tokenize, value, exchange, license, and monetize data, using blockchain-based ownership and smart-contract functionality.

Management told investors that partnerships on both the buy and sell sides of its exchanges could generate transaction-related revenue. The complaint alleges that actual trading activity on the Datavault Platform was substantially lower than the company's public descriptions suggested.

Datavault disputes allegations that its platform and technology were misrepresented.

Burke Products

Datavault announced in 2025 that its Burke relationship could generate revenue from existing contracts and expand opportunities in defense and aerospace. Plaintiff alleges Datavault overstated the economic significance and technological character of that relationship.

Scilex Holding Company

Datavault announced a proposed $150 million strategic investment from Scilex in September 2025 and, in April 2026, a term sheet contemplating a further $120 million cash contribution tied to Datavault's planned computing infrastructure. The complaint alleges Datavault overstated the certainty and economic significance of these arrangements.

Nature's Miracle

Datavault announced a carbon-credit-tokenization licensing arrangement involving a $2 million non-refundable license fee plus a 35% royalty. Plaintiff alleges the expected economic value of that relationship was overstated.

On October 31, 2025, Wolfpack Research — a short-selling research firm — published a report questioning numerous Datavault statements, including its corporate partnerships, activity on its data exchange, its AI and quantum-computing center in Sandy Springs, Georgia, and aspects of company leadership and affiliations. According to the complaint, DVLT fell approximately 19.44% to about $2.03 that day.

Important context: Wolfpack was short Datavault securities and therefore had a financial interest in a decline in the stock price. Datavault strongly denied Wolfpack's allegations, characterized the report as false and financially motivated, and later sued Wolfpack and its founder, Dan David.

Because these assertions originate with a short seller and are disputed, this page describes them as what Wolfpack alleged — not as established facts. Datavault has likewise disputed the allegation that it overstated the size or nature of its AI and quantum-computing center.

Datavault reported approximately $39.1 million in FY2025 revenue and projected at least $200 million in FY2026 revenue — described as roughly 400% year-over-year growth. The company repeatedly reaffirmed that target.

Importantly, the complaint does not allege that Datavault withdrew the $200 million projection. Instead, plaintiff alleges that the target lacked a reasonable basis because Datavault's partnerships, commercialization progress, platform activity, and financial condition were weaker than investors had been led to believe. Datavault continued to maintain the target through the August 2026 disclosures discussed in the complaint.

In April 2026, Datavault and Scilex entered into a term sheet contemplating a $120 million cash contribution tied to Datavault's planned computing infrastructure. SEC filings describe an executed binding term sheet; the contemplated financing nonetheless remained subject to definitive transaction documents and closing conditions. Datavault also stated publicly that the Scilex transaction and contemplated asset sales could provide $200 million or more in cash without equity dilution.

Days later, Datavault entered into a securities purchase agreement for approximately 109 million shares at $0.55 per share — about $60 million in gross proceeds, which the complaint alleges represented roughly an 18% increase in outstanding shares at a substantial discount. According to the complaint, DVLT declined approximately 24.7% following the financing announcement.

The complaint also alleges that a $120 million financing the company had described in May as 'secured' and 'non-dilutive' was later characterized as 'anticipated' rather than received, and that no portion had been received by the relevant time. Plaintiff alleges these events contradicted or called into question the company's earlier presentation of available non-dilutive financing. Those allegations have not been adjudicated.

The complaint alleges that Datavault announced its first Analyst & Investor Day for August 4, 2026 — intended to showcase how its AI, blockchain, and cybersecurity technology could create a unified commercial ecosystem — but then failed to proceed with the event and removed the announcement from its website without public explanation. According to the complaint, DVLT declined approximately 23.96%, closing at about $0.2825 on August 5.

This is described as an allegation in the complaint; the cancellation of an investor event is not, by itself, securities fraud.

In March 2026, Datavault stated that management believed it had sufficient liquidity for the following 12 months and that substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern had been alleviated. In August 2026, however, the company disclosed that its liquidity position again raised substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.

A going-concern disclosure does not mean a company has filed for bankruptcy or will necessarily cease operations. It means financial conditions create substantial doubt about the company's ability to meet its obligations and continue operating over the relevant assessment period. The complaint alleges the August disclosure contradicted or called into question the earlier liquidity representations.

On August 19, 2026, Datavault reported second-quarter revenue of approximately $6.7 million — substantial year-over-year growth — while continuing to maintain its full-year target. The complaint nevertheless focuses on an approximately $88 million quarterly net loss, continuing technology and infrastructure buildout, commercialization occurring primarily later in 2026, and the renewed going-concern disclosure.

According to the complaint, DVLT declined from approximately $0.3867 to approximately $0.2962 on August 19 — about 23.4% in one trading day, on volume exceeding 201 million shares.

No. This is a multi-disclosure case. The complaint expressly identifies alleged corrective disclosures on or around October 31, 2025; May 3–4, 2026; May 15, 2026; August 4–5, 2026; and August 19, 2026 — not a single stock decline.

Datavault disputes many of the allegations underlying the complaint — particularly those originating from the Wolfpack short-seller report — has sued Wolfpack and its founder, and has stated that it intends to vigorously defend the securities litigation.

Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5

The complaint asserts federal securities-fraud claims under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 against Datavault and the individual defendants.

Section 20(a)

The complaint asserts controlling-person claims against Moyer, Bradley, and Williams.

Forward-Looking Statements

The complaint alleges that the PSLRA safe harbor for forward-looking statements does not protect the challenged statements — contending, among other things, that some statements concerned existing facts and that cautionary language was inadequate. Whether Datavault's forward-looking statements receive safe-harbor protection is likely to be an issue in the litigation.

The current alleged class period is September 4, 2024 through August 18, 2026, inclusive.

Investors should preserve complete brokerage statements and trade confirmations for both DVLT and predecessor WISA purchases and sales.

The current published PSLRA lead plaintiff deadline is October 5, 2026. Because the expanded Zeng complaint arises against the backdrop of the earlier Datavault securities litigation, the September 25 filing has not produced investor notices using a new 60-day deadline; the current notices continue to use October 5, 2026.

Do I Have to Become Lead Plaintiff?

Generally, no. The lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to actively supervise the litigation and proposed class counsel. Most investors remain passive class members.

Lead Plaintiff Deadline ≠ Settlement Claim Deadline

These are different dates. An investor's ability to share in a possible future recovery generally does not depend on seeking lead-plaintiff status.

No — it is an overlapping but expanded action. The earlier Aramouni v. Datavault AI case (Case No. 2:26-cv-05548, also in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania) alleged a class period ending October 30, 2025.

The new Zeng complaint extends the alleged period through August 18, 2026 and adds allegations concerning financing, dilution, revenue guidance, commercialization, liquidity, and going-concern disclosures. Some search results may still show the earlier October 30, 2025 cutoff.

Potentially. The alleged class period begins September 4, 2024, when the company was still WiSA Technologies and traded under WISA. Investors who made qualifying WISA purchases during the alleged period should preserve their complete trading records.

Generally, no. Securities-class eligibility typically depends on qualifying transactions, losses, and other securities-law requirements, and selling the stock does not automatically eliminate a securities claim. Derivative standing is different and generally involves continued share ownership.

Potentially. Datavault AI is incorporated in Delaware. Because the alleged conduct spans nearly two years, different investors may have contemporaneous ownership for different alleged acts — for example, an investor who purchased DVLT in 2025 might potentially have standing concerning later events even without owning shares at the start of the class period.

Julie & Holleman LLP is separately investigating potential shareholder derivative and corporate-governance claims on behalf of shareholders who owned DVLT or predecessor WISA shares at the time of potentially actionable conduct and continue to hold shares. Potential areas of investigation may include:

• diligence concerning corporate partners and their capacity to perform;
• partnership revenue assumptions and commercialization metrics;
• the basis for the $200 million revenue forecast;
• liquidity, cash burn, and going-concern reporting;
• the Scilex financing and the May 2026 equity financing;
• disclosure controls; and
• board oversight.

Counsel may evaluate whether a Delaware books-and-records investigation or other appropriate investigative steps are warranted. No determination has been made that viable derivative claims exist.

Julie & Holleman LLP is investigating allegations involving Datavault AI, DVLT, WiSA Technologies, WISA, the Datavault Platform, Burke Products, Scilex, Nature's Miracle, AI and quantum computing, tokenization, data exchanges, the $200 million revenue target, non-dilutive financing, equity dilution, liquidity, going-concern disclosures, and corporate governance. We are interested in hearing from:

Investors With Securities Losses

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Datavault AI common stock (or predecessor WISA) between September 4, 2024 and August 18, 2026 and suffered losses, including investors evaluating whether to seek lead-plaintiff appointment before October 5, 2026.

Current Datavault AI Shareholders

Shareholders who owned DVLT or predecessor WISA shares at the time of potentially actionable conduct and continue to hold shares, concerning potential derivative and corporate-governance rights.

A shareholder may potentially fall within both groups.