Time-Sensitive: Allegations focus on Procept’s assurances about the handpiece-to-procedure differential and explanations that attributed revenue volatility to transient saline shortages rather than alleged inventory overstocking.

NEW YORK, July 29, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — Levi & Korsinsky, LLP alerts investors in PROCEPT BIOROBOTICS CORPORATION (NASDAQ: PRCT) of a pending securities class action involving handpiece procedure differential medical technology securities allegations. Class Period: February 28, 2024 through February 25, 2026. Check if you might be eligible to recover your investment losses. Questions may be directed to Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at jlevi@levikorsinsky.com or (212) 363-7500.

PRCT shares declined more than 75%, equal to approximately $75.00 per share from a Class Period high, after serial disclosures culminating on February 25, 2026. The Court has set September 22, 2026 as the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff appointment.

Investors deserve transparency about material risks that could affect their investments, especially where recurring revenue indicators depend on the relationship between consumable sales and actual procedures. The allegations here focus on whether Procept’s public assurances gave investors a reliable view of demand or masked a growing inventory imbalance. — Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

What Management Allegedly Told Investors About Procedure Demand

The lawsuit asserts that Procept repeatedly reassured investors that the relationship between handpiece unit sales and actual procedures remained stable. As alleged, management told the market that customers ordered product as needed, that Procept had high visibility into procedures, and that no meaningful change had occurred in the trend between handpieces sold and procedures performed.

The action claims those assurances were material because Procept’s valuation depended heavily on recurring handpiece sales and utilization of its installed AquaBeam Robotic Systems. When handpiece sales were treated as a proxy for procedures, investors allegedly relied on that metric as evidence of underlying clinical demand.

Medical Technology Revenue Signals in Handpiece Utilization

• Procept’s recurring revenue model depended on single-use handpieces sold for approximately $3,200 per unit.
• The complaint alleges that investors used handpiece volume as a practical indicator of utilization across installed systems.
• Management allegedly described fluctuations in procedure volumes as linked to transient externalities, including saline supply constraints.
• The action claims those explanations did not adequately disclose alleged inventory overstocking in the field.
• Procept later disclosed that handpiece sales had exceeded actual procedures by 8% to 16% every quarter since Q1 2023.

Why the Alleged Differential Matters to PRCT Investors

As alleged, the difference between consumable sales and actual procedure counts became critical once Procept disclosed procedure data that had not previously been provided to investors. The complaint contends that the market had been evaluating Procept based on reported handpiece demand without knowing that field inventory had accumulated substantially.

The lawsuit further asserts that Procept’s explanations regarding saline shortages and other external factors understated the alleged significance of customer inventory levels. By the end of the Class Period, the alleged excess field inventory exceeded 10,000 units, and the Company reported a 30% sequential contraction in unit sales.

Learn more about the case or call (212) 363-7500.

ABOUT LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP — Over the past 20 years, Levi & Korsinsky has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. The firm has extensive expertise in complex securities litigation and a team of over 70 employees. For seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky has ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services’ Top 50 Report. Investors who suffered losses have until September 22, 2026 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.

Frequently Asked Questions About the PRCT Lawsuit

Q: What specific misstatements does the PRCT lawsuit allege? A: The complaint alleges PROCEPT BIOROBOTICS CORPORATION made materially false or misleading statements regarding the relationship between handpiece unit sales and actual procedures, including assurances that the differential remained relatively consistent and that revenue fluctuations were attributable to transient externalities such as saline shortages. When the Company disclosed actual procedure data and inventory-related sales pressure, the stock price declined sharply.

Q: How much did PRCT stock drop? A: Shares fell approximately 75%, a decline of about $75.00 per share from the Class Period high, after Procept disclosed that handpiece sales had exceeded actual procedures by 8% to 16% every quarter since Q1 2023 and reported a 30% sequential contraction in unit sales. Investors who purchased shares during the Class Period at allegedly inflated prices and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.

Q: What court was the PRCT class action filed in? A: The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, and is governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Q: What is a lead plaintiff and why does it matter? A: A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the entire class. Lead plaintiffs are typically investors with the largest documented losses. Being appointed does not increase individual recovery but gives direct oversight of how the case is run.

Q: What if I already sold my PRCT shares — can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought during the Class Period and sold at a loss may still be eligible to participate.

Q: Do I need to go to court or give testimony? A: No. The overwhelming majority of class members never appear in court or give depositions. If there is a settlement or recovery, eligible class members generally submit a claim form to seek their portion.

Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to contact the firm. Securities class actions are generally handled on a pure contingency basis. No upfront fees, no retainer, and no out-of-pocket costs. Any attorneys’ fees and expenses awarded to class counsel are subject to court approval.

CONTACT:

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP

Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Ed Korsinsky, Esq.

33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor

New York, NY 10004

jlevi@levikorsinsky.com

Tel: (212) 363-7500

Fax: (212) 363-7171

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/levi–korsinsky-reminds-procept-biorobotics-corporation-investors-of-the-pending-class-action-lawsuit-with-a-lead-plaintiff-deadline-of-september-22-2026—prct-302837379.html

SOURCE Levi & Korsinsky, LLP