Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (“Robbins Geller”) (http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/oceanpower/) today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of purchasers of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (“Ocean Power”) (NASDAQ:OPTT) common stock during the period between January 14, 2014 and July 14, 2014 (the “Class Period”), including purchasers in Ocean Power’s April 3, 2014 follow-on public stock offering (“Follow-on Offering”) at $3.10 per share.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from June 13, 2014. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/oceanpower/. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

The complaint charges Ocean Power and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Ocean Power develops and is seeking to commercialize proprietary systems that generate electricity by harnessing the renewable energy of ocean waves.

On April 3, 2014, the Company sold 4.37 million shares of Ocean Power common stock to the public at $3.10 per share, raising more than $13.5 million in gross proceeds. The complaint alleges that in carrying out the Follow-on Offering, and throughout the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business results and financial prospects in press releases, analyst conference calls and filings with the SEC in order to buttress the market price of its stock. As a result of defendants’ false statements, the price of Ocean Power stock traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period, reaching a Class Period high of $7.01 per share in intraday trading on March 11, 2014.

On June 10, 2014, Ocean Power suddenly announced that it had terminated its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), defendant Charles F. Dunleavy, “for cause.” The Company also announced that the Company’s Board of Directors had appointed a Special Committee, composed of outside directors and the Interim CEO, to conduct an internal investigation into the agreement between Victorian Wave Partners Pty Ltd (“VWP”), a project-specific operating entity wholly owned by the Company’s subsidiary Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd, and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, and related public statements concerning that project. On this news, shares of Ocean Power declined over 34% to close on June 10, 2014 at $1.63 per share.

Thereafter, on July 14, 2014, after the close of trading, the Company disclosed that Ocean Power was canceling the plans to build the renewable-energy project off the Australian coast altogether, with the Company’s VWP unit halting plans to deploy its PowerBuoys off the coast of Victoria, conceding now that the A$232 million (US$217 million) project was not “commercially viable.” Ocean Power also stated that it would return the A$5.6 million it received as part of a A$66.5 million grant from the Australian government to support the project. On this news, the price of Ocean Power common stock fell another 23% to close at $1.18 per share on July 15, 2014, its lowest price since Ocean Power’s U.S. initial public offering in 2007.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) the Company may have misstated the nature and/or circumstances of its agreement with the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to build a renewable energy project off the Australian coast; (b) the renewable energy project off the Australian coast was not commercially viable; and (c) as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ statements concerning the renewable energy project off the Australian coast and positive statements about Ocean Power’s business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Ocean Power common stock during the Class Period (the “Class”). The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.

Robbins Geller, with more than 200 lawyers in ten offices, represents U.S. and international institutional investors in contingency-based securities and corporate litigation. The firm has obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest jury verdict ever in a securities class action. Please visit http://www.rgrdlaw.com for more information.