Press release
All Three Leading Proxy Advisory Firms – ISS, Glass Lewis, and Egan-Jones – Recommend Zevra Stockholders Vote FOR the Company’s Director Nominees
ISS, Glass Lewis, and Egan-Jones Unanimously Conclude Mangless Has Not Made a Compelling Case for Change Board and Management Urge Stockholders to Follow
About this update from Zevra Therapeutics, Inc.
[{"type":"text","content":"ISS, Glass Lewis, and Egan-Jones Unanimously Conclude Mangless Has Not Made a Compelling Case for Change Board and Management Urge Stockholders to Follow Proxy Advisors’ Recommendation and Vote “FOR” Wendy L. Dixon, Ph.D. and Tamara A. Favorito on the WHITE Proxy Card and “WITHHOLD” for Mangless Nominees CELEBRATION, Fla., May 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Zevra Therapeutics, Inc. (NasdaqGS: ZVRA) (“Zevra,” or the “Company”), a commercial-stage company focused on providing therapies to people living with rare disease, today announced that all three leading proxy advisory firms, Institutional Shareholder Services (“ISS”), Glass Lewis & Co. (“Glass Lewis”), and Egan-Jones Proxy Services (“Egan-Jones”) have recommended that stockholders vote “FOR” Wendy L. Dixon, Ph.D. and Tamara A. Favorito and “WITHHOLD” on dissident nominees Travis Mickle and Arthur Regan on the WHITE proxy card at the upcoming 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, scheduled to be held on May 29, 2025 (the “Annual Meeting”). In response to the positive recommendations from all three leading proxy advisors, the Zevra Board of Directors issued the following statement: “We are pleased that all three leading proxy advisory firms – ISS, Glass Lewis, and Egan-Jones – unanimously endorsed Zevra's current Board and strategic direction. These independent third-party recommendations validate our position that Mangless has failed to present a compelling case for change. Our Board and management team remain committed to serving our stockholders and continuing the significant value creation we've delivered under current leadership.” All three proxy advisors concluded that Mangless (the “dissident”) has provided insufficient arguments to justify electing its nominees to the Board, and has failed to present a case for change.1 ISS said, “…based on the limited information available in the public domain, the dissident has presented a case for change that would be insufficient for a minority position, let alone the majority position that is effectively being sought…”Glass Lewis acknowledged that Mangless failed to provide any clear strategy or explanation of what he intends to accomplish or how he proposes to increase stockholder value, noting, “While we consider the sum of available arguments already weighs meaningfully against the Dissident agenda, we believe it is worth stressin...