Multiple reports have emerged highlighting one or more securities class action lawsuits against Ramaco Resources regarding the company’s Brook mine in northern Wyoming. The complaints allege that the company made misleading statements regarding the Brook mine and failed to disclose material adverse facts to investors.
The initial complaint was filed by The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz and Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP on behalf of the plaintiff, although it was also filed on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Ramaco Resources, Inc. securities between July 31, 2025, and October 23, 2025, inclusive. It was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and is captioned Henning v. Ramaco Resources, Inc. et al (Case No. 1:26-cv-00846). Several other firms, such as The Schall Law Firm, The DJS Law Group and Pomerantz LLP, among others, have issued investigations or notices looking into a potential securities class action against Ramaco for the Brook mine.
According to the initial complaint, Wolfpack Research published a report on October 23, 2025, alleging that Ramaco’s Brook mine is a “hoax” and a “Potemkin Mine,” and that the mine was not mined after its July groundbreaking. The report also alleges that the company “built this mine for show,” and reveals that, as shown by drone footage taken three months after the mine’s opening, no active work appears to have occurred. The report states that “[d]espite multiple site visits during working hours over several weeks” Wolfpack researchers “never observed the equipment mentioned in news reports or any active work.”
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that “throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the company’s business, operations and prospects,” and that “as a result of defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the company’s securities, plaintiff and other class members have suffered significant losses and damages.”
More specifically, the complaint alleges that Ramaco “failed to disclose to investors: (1) that defendants had not commenced any significant mining activity at the Brook mine after groundbreaking; (2) that no active work was taking place at the Brook mine; (3) that, as a result, the company overstated development progress at the Brook mine; and (4) that, 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.”
After Wolfpack Research’s report was released in October, Ramaco’s stock price fell $3.81, or 9.6%, to close at $36.01 per share.
The litigation is still in its early stages, and the court has not yet appointed a lead plaintiff or lead counsel.
Coal Age reached out to Ramaco Resources for a comment, and the company has not responded.
Source: www.coalage.com
