Limited again, 49ers QB Brock Purdy still fighting sore shoulderBrock Purdy participated in the start of Thursday's practice with the 49ers but the San Francisco starting quarterback was not on the field for the majority of the workout, casting doubt over his availability to play Sunday at Green Bay. Purdy is dealing with a right shoulder injury and the 49ers are also potentially without left tackle Trent Williams and Nick Bosa due to injuries. Bosa was listed as out of Thursday's practice with an oblique injury. Williams also didn't suit up Thursday. He played through an ankle injury last week after being listed as questionable. Purdy's typical Thursday post-practice media session was scrapped until Friday as the 49ers did not make any quarterback available. Kyle Allen would step in for Purdy as the starter if he can't play against the Packers. Run game coordinator Chris Foerster said the 49ers aren't where they want to be at 5-5 because they haven't won close games, not because of injuries. "Seven games left is like an eternity," Foerster said. "So much can happen. Do the math. What was our record last year? It was 12-5. I was on a 13-win team that was nowhere near as good as the team last year." With or without Purdy, Foerster said the challenge for the 49ers is not to give up the ball to a defense that has 19 takeaways. The 49ers have 13 giveaways this season. --Field Level Media
None
Larson Financial Group LLC grew its stake in Ambarella, Inc. ( NASDAQ:AMBA – Free Report ) by 6,014.3% in the 3rd quarter, according to its most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 856 shares of the semiconductor company’s stock after purchasing an additional 842 shares during the quarter. Larson Financial Group LLC’s holdings in Ambarella were worth $48,000 at the end of the most recent quarter. Several other institutional investors and hedge funds have also recently modified their holdings of AMBA. Algert Global LLC increased its position in shares of Ambarella by 76.2% during the third quarter. Algert Global LLC now owns 94,999 shares of the semiconductor company’s stock valued at $5,358,000 after buying an additional 41,094 shares during the period. Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. grew its holdings in shares of Ambarella by 1.2% during the 3rd quarter. Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. now owns 320,319 shares of the semiconductor company’s stock worth $18,068,000 after acquiring an additional 3,700 shares during the period. Intech Investment Management LLC purchased a new position in shares of Ambarella during the 3rd quarter worth approximately $722,000. Connor Clark & Lunn Investment Management Ltd. raised its position in shares of Ambarella by 18.9% in the 3rd quarter. Connor Clark & Lunn Investment Management Ltd. now owns 226,502 shares of the semiconductor company’s stock worth $12,776,000 after acquiring an additional 35,977 shares in the last quarter. Finally, KBC Group NV lifted its stake in shares of Ambarella by 1.3% in the 3rd quarter. KBC Group NV now owns 41,835 shares of the semiconductor company’s stock valued at $2,360,000 after purchasing an additional 525 shares during the period. 82.09% of the stock is owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors. Insider Activity at Ambarella In other Ambarella news, CEO Feng-Ming Wang sold 4,382 shares of the business’s stock in a transaction on Wednesday, September 4th. The shares were sold at an average price of $56.02, for a total transaction of $245,479.64. Following the completion of the sale, the chief executive officer now directly owns 803,574 shares in the company, valued at approximately $45,016,215.48. The trade was a 0.54 % decrease in their position. The sale was disclosed in a filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is accessible through this hyperlink . Also, VP Yun-Lung Chen sold 5,963 shares of the firm’s stock in a transaction on Tuesday, September 3rd. The stock was sold at an average price of $57.56, for a total value of $343,230.28. Following the completion of the transaction, the vice president now owns 62,026 shares in the company, valued at approximately $3,570,216.56. This trade represents a 8.77 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . Insiders have sold a total of 24,423 shares of company stock worth $1,356,402 over the last quarter. Company insiders own 5.70% of the company’s stock. Ambarella Trading Down 1.2 % Ambarella ( NASDAQ:AMBA – Get Free Report ) last posted its earnings results on Tuesday, August 27th. The semiconductor company reported ($0.13) earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating the consensus estimate of ($0.19) by $0.06. Ambarella had a negative net margin of 62.38% and a negative return on equity of 23.52%. The business had revenue of $63.70 million for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $62.10 million. During the same quarter in the prior year, the business earned ($0.76) EPS. The business’s revenue for the quarter was up 2.6% compared to the same quarter last year. As a group, research analysts forecast that Ambarella, Inc. will post -3 EPS for the current year. Analyst Upgrades and Downgrades Several equities research analysts recently weighed in on AMBA shares. Susquehanna upped their price target on Ambarella from $70.00 to $85.00 and gave the stock a “positive” rating in a research note on Wednesday. Roth Mkm reiterated a “neutral” rating and issued a $60.00 price target on shares of Ambarella in a research note on Wednesday, August 28th. Northland Securities reissued an “outperform” rating and set a $95.00 price target (up from $75.00) on shares of Ambarella in a research report on Wednesday. Rosenblatt Securities restated a “buy” rating and issued a $85.00 price objective on shares of Ambarella in a report on Friday, August 23rd. Finally, Stifel Nicolaus lifted their target price on shares of Ambarella from $80.00 to $95.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a report on Wednesday. Two investment analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, three have given a hold rating and eight have issued a buy rating to the stock. According to data from MarketBeat.com, Ambarella currently has an average rating of “Hold” and an average price target of $81.67. Read Our Latest Stock Report on Ambarella Ambarella Profile ( Free Report ) Ambarella, Inc develops semiconductor solutions that enable high-definition (HD) and ultra HD compression, image signal processing, and artificial intelligence processing worldwide. The company's system-on-a-chip designs integrated HD video processing, image processing, artificial intelligence computer vision algorithms, audio processing, and system functions onto a single chip for delivering video and image quality, differentiated functionality, and low power consumption. Featured Articles Want to see what other hedge funds are holding AMBA? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Ambarella, Inc. ( NASDAQ:AMBA – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for Ambarella Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Ambarella and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .A Miami-Dade hearing officer dismissed two traffic citations against Tyreek Hill Tuesday that stemmed from near Hard Rock Stadium in September. The citations were dropped because the officers involved in the incident failed to appear in court, . Hill was issued a $179 careless driving citation and a $219 seat-belt violation from the incident that took place as Hill was driving to Hard Rock Stadium for the Dolphins' Sept. 8 season opener against the Jacksonville Jaguars. shows that officers pulled Hill over near the stadium. An officer ordered Hill to roll the window down in his car. When Hill cracked his window open but didn't roll it down completely, officers opened his car door, dragged him out of his car and pinned him face down on the street as one officer placed his knee on Hill's back. SLATER SCOOP: Tyreek Hill body-cam video from Miami-Dade Police. — Andy Slater (@AndySlater) Officers handcuffed Hill and eventually released him in time for Hill to play in the game. Hill was not charged with a crime. Miami-Dade police officer Manuel Batista is Miami-Dade police officer Danny Torres is . Neither appeared in court on Tuesday, prompting hearing officer Patricia Henrys to dismiss the citations, per court records . The incident prompted calls including from Hill, his attorneys, and the Dolphins for Miami-Dade police to take disciplinary action against the officers involved. Miami-Dade police placed Torres on administrative duties after the incident pending an internal affairs investigation. It's not clear if the investigation has been completed. Results have not been publicly released. Torres remains on administrative leave, the Herald reports. Hill's attorneys Julius Collins, Devon Jacob, Stephen Kelly and Jeffrey Neiman on Tuesday addressing the dismissal of the citations and continued their call for discipline against the officers involved: "As anticipated, the traffic citations against Tyreek Hill were dismissed," the statement reads. "Police officers should not issue citations unless they are willing to testify in court, under oath, with respect to same. Officer Torres and Batista's absence from court today evidences their knowledge of wrongdoing. These officers should be disciplined for their failure to appear. Mr. Hill was entitled to have his day in court and the officers failed to appear. "It is our belief that Officer Torres and Officer Batista failed to appear in court so that they could not be questioned under oath." Hill responded to the news on social media: Where all the internet cops now — Ty Hill (@cheetah) Neither Miami-Dade police, Batista or Torres have addressed the decision in public. South Florida Police Benevolent Association president Steadman Stahl told the Herald that he doesn't know why Batista and Torres failed to appear. “Officers quite often find themselves in conflict with other cases,” Stahl said. “But, in this particular case, I don’t know what that conflict was.” Per the Herald, a Miami-Dade police spokesperson said that the department planned to issue a statement addressing the decision later Tuesday. Hill's teammates Calais Campbell and Jonnu Smith when they saw that Hill was being detained. Smith was also cited and issued a $129 fine for having an expired license plate and a $179 fine for failing to obey a traffic control device. Per the Herald, Miami-Dade traffic infraction officer Thomas Cobitz dismissed both citations against Smith on Friday. Court records show the “wrong statute cited" regarding the citation for failing to obey a traffic control device. Campbell was not cited.BY MELISSA GOLDIN Social media users are misrepresenting a Vermont Supreme Court ruling , claiming that it gives schools permission to vaccinate children even if their parents do not consent. The ruling addressed a lawsuit filed by Dario and Shujen Politella against Windham Southeast School District and state officials over the mistaken vaccination of their child against COVID-19 in 2021, when he was 6 years old. A lower court had dismissed the original complaint, as well as an amended version. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was filed on Nov. 19. But the ruling by Vermont’s high court is not as far-reaching as some online have claimed. In reality, it concluded that anyone protected under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, or PREP, Act is immune to state lawsuits. Here’s a closer look at the facts. CLAIM: The Vermont Supreme Court ruled that schools can vaccinate children against their parents’ wishes. THE FACTS: The claim stems from a July 26 ruling by the Vermont Supreme Court, which found that anyone protected by the PREP Act is immune to state lawsuits, including the officials named in the Politella’s suit. The ruling does not authorize schools to vaccinate children at their discretion. According to the lawsuit, the Politella’s son — referred to as L.P. — was given one dose of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at a vaccination clinic held at Academy School in Brattleboro even though his father, Dario, told the school’s assistant principal a few days before that his son was not to receive a vaccination. In what officials described as a mistake, L.P. was removed from class and had a “handwritten label” put on his shirt with the name and date of birth of another student, L.K., who had already been vaccinated that day. L.P. was then vaccinated. Ultimately, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that officials involved in the case could not be sued. “We conclude that the PREP Act immunizes every defendant in this case and this fact alone is enough to dismiss the case,” the Vermont Supreme Court’s ruling reads. “We conclude that when the federal PREP Act immunizes a defendant, the PREP Act bars all state-law claims against that defendant as a matter of law.” The PREP Act , enacted by Congress in 2005, authorizes the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to issue a declaration in the event of a public health emergency providing immunity from liability for activities related to medical countermeasures, such as the administration of a vaccine, except in cases of “willful misconduct” that result in “death or serious physical injury.” A declaration against COVID-19 was issued on March 17, 2020. It is set to expire on Dec. 31. Federals suits claiming willful misconduct are filed in Washington. Social media users described the Vermont Supreme Court’s ruling as having consequences beyond what it actually says. “The Vermont Supreme Court has ruled that schools can force-vaccinate children for Covid against the wishes of their parents,” reads one X post that had been liked and shared approximately 16,600 times as of Tuesday. “The high court ruled on a case involving a 6-year-old boy who was forced to take a Covid mRNA injection by his school. However, his family had explicitly stated that they didn’t want their child to receive the ‘vaccines.’” Other users alleged that the ruling gives schools permission to give students any vaccine without parental consent, not just ones for COVID-19. Rod Smolla, president of the Vermont Law and Graduate School and an expert on constitutional law, told The Associated Press that the ruling “merely holds that the federal statute at issue, the PREP Act, preempts state lawsuits in cases in which officials mistakenly administer a vaccination without consent.” “Nothing in the Vermont Supreme Court opinion states that school officials can vaccinate a child against the instructions of the parent,” he wrote in an email. Asked whether the claims spreading online have any merit, Ronald Ferrara, an attorney representing the Politellas, told the AP that although the ruling doesn’t say schools can vaccinate students regardless of parental consent, officials could interpret it to mean that they could get away with doing so under the PREP Act, at least when it comes to COVID-19 vaccines. He explained that the U.S. Supreme Court appeal seeks to clarify whether the Vermont Supreme Court interpreted the PREP Act beyond what Congress intended. “The Politella’s fundamental liberty interest to decide whether their son should receive elective medical treatment was denied by agents of the State and School,” he wrote in an email to the AP. “The Vermont Court misconstrues the scope of PREP Act immunity (which is conditioned upon informed consent for medical treatments unapproved by FDA), to cover this denial of rights and its underlying battery.” Ferrara added that he was not aware of the claims spreading online, but that he “can understand how lay people may conflate the court’s mistaken grant of immunity for misconduct as tantamount to blessing such misconduct.”
A number of prominent pundits, including former City defender and club ambassador Micah Richards, have questioned why the Belgium international has not been starting games amid the champions’ dramatic slump. City have not won in seven outings in all competitions – their worst run since 2008 – with De Bruyne featuring only as a substitute in the last five of those matches after recovering from a pelvic injury. The latest came with a 12-minute run-out in Sunday’s demoralising 2-0 defeat at Premier League leaders Liverpool, a result which left City 11 points off the pace and fifth in the table. Richards said on The Rest is Football podcast it appeared “there’s some sort of rift going on” between De Bruyne and Guardiola while former England striker Gary Lineker added: “It seems like all’s not well.” Former Liverpool defender Jamie Carragher said he felt “something isn’t right” and fellow Sky Sports analyst Gary Neville, the ex-Manchester United right-back, described the situation as “unusual, bizarre, strange”. Guardiola, speaking at a press conference to preview his side’s clash with Nottingham Forest, responded on Tuesday. The Spaniard said: “People say I’ve got a problem with Kevin. Do you think I like to not play with Kevin? No, I don’t want Kevin to play? “The guy who has the most talent in the final third, I don’t want it? I have a personal problem with him after nine years together? “He’s delivered to me the biggest success to this club, but he’s been five months injured (last season) and two months injured (this year). “He’s 33 years old. He needs time to find his best, like last season, step by step. He’ll try to do it and feel better. I’m desperate to have his best.” De Bruyne has not started since being forced off at half-time of City’s Champions League clash with Inter Milan on September 18, having picked up an injury in the previous game. Both the player and manager have spoken since of the pain he was in and the need to ease back into action, but his spell on the bench has been unexpectedly long. The resulting speculation has then been exacerbated because De Bruyne is in the final year of his contract but Guardiola maintains nothing untoward has occurred. He said: “I’d love to have the Kevin in his prime, 26 or 27. He would love it to – but he is not 26 or 27 any more. “He had injuries in the past, important and long ones. He is a guy who needs to be physically fit for his space and energy. You think I’m complaining? It’s normal, it’s nature. “He’s played in 10 or 11 seasons a lot of games and I know he is desperate to help us. He gives glimpses of brilliance that only he can have. “But, always I said, he himself will not solve our problems, like Erling (Haaland) won’t solve it himself. We attack and defend together. “We want the best players back. Hopefully step by step the confidence will come back and we’ll get the best of all of us.”
NoneThe IPO market picked up in 2024, with 210 companies going public this year. Many companies are still reluctant to embark on an initial public offering after the brutal bear market in 2022 shaved more than 20% off of the S&P 500. The hesitation remains, despite the fact that the stock market has soared since then, with the and sitting at and 2024 on track to see a second straight year of gains of over 25% for the benchmark index. About 40 companies have withdrawn their IPO filings this year, compared to seven that withdrew plans to go public in 2023. While 2024's IPO activity represents an increase of 36% compared to last year, it's still well below the IPO activity seen in 2020 and 2021, when 480 and 1,035 companies went public, respectively. Some of the biggest companies investors are include Stripe, Klarna, CoreWeave, and SpaceX. Still, some well-known companies, including , , and , debuted on the public markets this year — and some of these companies have delivered massive share gains for investors. These are the top 10 performing IPOs of US-based companies in 2024, as of December 9. April 25 112% May 23 118% February 14 118% February 7 138% December 5 223% April 25 227% March 20 239% June 28 267% March 21 379% May 8 525% Read the original article on
The 11 Best Sweatshirts You’ll Want to Wear All Day