XTEND Highlights U.S. Drone Manufacturing Expansion as New Tariffs Strengthen Case for Domestic NDAA-Compliant Supply Chain

~ New Tariffs of Up to 100% on Imported Drones Underscore the Case for the Domestic, NDAA-Compliant Manufacturing Base XTEND Has Been Building ~

~ Company’s Growing Tampa-Based XFAB Facility and U.S. Manufacturing Relationships Support XTEND’s Plans to Scale Production as America Reduces Reliance on Foreign-Made Drone Technology ~

TAMPA, Fla., Aug. 14, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —

JFB Construction Holdings (Nasdaq: JFB) announced today that XTEND, a leader in AI-powered autonomy and software-defined robotics, is positioned to support America’s newly announced drive to strengthen its domestic drone industrial base. President Trump this week signed a proclamation imposing tariffs of up to 100% on imported drones and certain drone components, citing national security risks tied to foreign-made, and in particular Chinese-made, unmanned aircraft technology and the need to strengthen the U.S. drone industrial base. Under the proclamation, drones weighing more than 25 kilograms or equipped with thermal imaging, along with their docking stations and critical components, are subject to a 100% tariff, while smaller drones lacking security-sensitive features and other drone components face a 25% tariff, with most provisions taking effect within 21 days of signing.

As the United States moves decisively to strengthen its domestic drone industrial base and reduce dependence on Chinese technology, XTEND finds itself exactly where it was built to be.

XTEND has been developing and supplying NDAA-compliant drone technology and robotic systems to the U.S. Department of War (“DOW”), winning U.S. defense programs and investing in the American manufacturing infrastructure needed to produce them at scale in the United States.

XTEND’s growing U.S. manufacturing facility, XFAB, in Tampa, Florida, which XTEND is continuing to develop and expand, was built around this exact vision, which is directly aligned with the objectives of the new proclamation: bring critical drone technology, components and manufacturing to the United States and create a secure American alternative to foreign-controlled supply chains. The Tampa facility is the U.S. anchor of XTEND’s global XFAB manufacturing network, which combines localized regional production with centralized software innovation through its proprietary XTEND Operating System (XOS) across facilities in the United States, the United Kingdom, Singapore, Israel, and Latvia. Earlier this month, XTEND announced that it had produced seven robotic platforms across its five global XFAB facilities in a single week, all powered by XOS. As XTEND continues to build out its U.S. production capacity, it also works with U.S.-based manufacturers to support increased production. XTEND believes it brings not only its technology, but also its proven XFAB model for building a network of American manufacturing at scale.

Beyond defense, XTEND is also expanding into the private security market, and expects its ability to deliver NDAA-compliant drones manufactured in the United States to be a competitive advantage there as well, as private security customers increasingly prioritize secure, domestically manufactured systems.

Today, that vision has become a national priority.

XTEND wasn’t built in response to this moment. XTEND was built for it.

“We made the bet that America would need a homegrown, NDAA-compliant alternative to Chinese drone technology, and we are building XFAB, our people and our supply chain around that bet,” said Aviv Shapira, Chief Executive Officer of XTEND. “These tariffs validate what our defense customers have known for years: security and resilience start with who builds your technology and where. We’re not reacting to this moment; we’ve been preparing for it since day one, and we’re building the capacity to scale.”

To sign up to receive press releases in real time, please visit ir.xtend.me.

As announced on February 17, 2026, JFB Construction Holdings (Nasdaq: JFB) and XTEND entered into a definitive agreement to combine in an all-stock transaction. The business combination is further supported by strategic investments from Eric Trump, Unusual Machines, American Ventures, LLC, Protego Ventures, and Aliya Capital. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission declared the registration statement on Form S-4 relating to the transaction effective on August 11, 2026, clearing the way toward an anticipated closing on September 1, 2026, subject to customary closing conditions. Upon closing, the combined company will be renamed XTEND AI Robotics, Inc., a U.S. public company incorporated in Delaware, and is expected to trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol “XTND.” The closing will complete XTEND’s transition to a U.S.-domiciled public company, aligning its corporate structure with its growing American manufacturing footprint.

About XTEND

XTEND is a leader in software systems and artificial intelligence-powered robotics, deployed in high-threat, complex operational environments where human exposure carries significant risk. Powered by its proprietary XTEND Operating System (XOS), XTEND’s integrated software and advanced robotic hardware solutions are designed to provide autonomy at the edge. Operating across defense, law enforcement, and private security missions through a platform of robots, drones, and robotic subsystems, XTEND’s open architecture platform facilitates scalability across partners and third-party applications. With over 12,500 systems deployed in over 30 countries, XTEND’s solutions have been validated in five combat zones and operationally deployed by national defense, special-mission units, and security organizations across the globe. Founded in Tel Aviv, Israel, and headquartered in Tampa, Florida, XTEND delivers NDAA-compliant solutions through a global network of regional XFAB manufacturing facilities located in the U.S., the U.K., Singapore, Israel, and Latvia. XTEND has previously announced a proposed business combination with JFB Construction Holdings (Nasdaq: JFB); upon closing, the combined company will be renamed XTEND AI Robotics, Inc., a U.S. public company incorporated in Delaware. For more information, visit

www.xtend.me

.

About JFB Construction Holdings

JFB Construction Holdings (Nasdaq: JFB) is a real estate development and construction company that has provided general contracting and construction management services in 36 U.S. states. For more information, visit the company’s SEC filings at

www.sec.gov

.

Forward-Looking Statements

This communication contains, and oral statements made from time to time by our representatives may contain, forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These forward-looking statements generally include statements regarding the anticipated impact of recently announced U.S. tariffs on imported drones and drone components, XTEND’s ability to scale U.S. manufacturing at its XFAB facility, XTEND’s relationships with U.S.-based manufacturers, its ability to build a network of U.S. manufacturing at scale, and their anticipated contribution to increased production, XTEND’s expansion into the private security market and the anticipated benefits of U.S.-based, NDAA-compliant manufacturing in that market, the potential transaction between XTEND Reality Expansion Ltd. (“XTEND”) and JFB Construction Holdings (“JFB”), including statements regarding the expected impacts and benefits of the potential transaction, the timing of the transaction closing, and strategic initiatives for XTEND AI Robotics, Inc. (“NewCo”) following the closing. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this communication may be forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “outlook,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “could,” “intends,” “targets,” “projects,” “contemplates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions.

The forward-looking statements in this communication are only predictions. XTEND’s and JFB’s management have based these forward-looking statements largely on their current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that management believes may affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from what is expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to: the ultimate scope, duration, and implementation of recently announced tariffs on imported drones and components, and their impact on XTEND’s costs, competitive position, and customers; the proposed transaction with JFB may not be consummated, or may not close on the anticipated timeline; there may be difficulties integrating the two companies and realizing the expected benefits of the transaction; XTEND’s ability to complete the continued development of, and scale U.S.-based manufacturing at XFAB to meet increased demand; XTEND’s ability to maintain and expand its relationships with U.S.-based manufacturers, to build a network of U.S.-based manufacturing at scale, and to realize the expected benefits of these relationships; XTEND’s ability to successfully expand into the private security market; XTEND’s dependence on a limited number of defense and governmental security customers for a substantial portion of its business; significant delays or reductions in appropriations, XTEND’s programs and certain government funding and programs more broadly, including as a result of a prolonged continuing resolution and/or government shutdown, and/or related to the global security environment or other global events; increased competition within XTEND’s and JFB’s markets; changes in procurement and other U.S. and foreign laws, including changes through executive orders and tariff actions, contract terms and practices applicable to our industry; disruptions in supply chains and the cost of components and materials; cyber and other security threats or disruptions faced by XTEND and JFB, its customers or its suppliers and other partners; and XTEND’s ability to innovate, develop new products and technologies, and maintain technologies to meet the needs of XTEND’s customers. In addition, a number of important factors could cause JFB’s, XTEND’s or NewCo’s actual future results and other future circumstances to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements, including but not limited to those important factors discussed in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the registration statement on Form S-4 filed by JFB and NewCo, as any such factors may be updated from time to time in other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), which are available on the SEC’s website at

https://www.sec.gov

and on XTEND’s investor relations site at

https://www.xtend.me/newsroom

and JFB’s investor relations site at

https://investors.jfbconstruction.net/

. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and, except as may be required under applicable law, neither XTEND nor JFB undertakes any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Important Information for Investors and Stockholders

This communication is for informational purposes only and is not intended to, and does not, constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities or a solicitation of any vote or approval, nor shall there be any issuance or sale of securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction. Investors and security holders of XTEND and JFB are urged to read the information statement/prospectus and registration statement on Form S-4, and any other document that has been or will be filed with the SEC in connection with the proposed transaction, carefully and in their entirety, because they contain important information. Investors and security holders will be able to obtain free copies of these documents through the website maintained by the SEC at

https://www.sec.gov

, or free of charge on JFB’s website at

https://investors.jfbconstruction.net/

.

JFB Construction Holdings Contact:

CORE IR

Mike Mason

516-222-2560


[email protected]

XTEND Media Contact:

Headline Media

Sarah Small

929-255-1449


[email protected]

XTEND Investor Relations:

MZ North America

Shannon Devine


[email protected]


203-741-8811

Source link

Quartz Manufacturing Alliance of America Commends ITC for Affirmative Injury Determination in Global Safeguard Case

WASHINGTON, April 1, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — The Quartz Manufacturing Alliance of America (QMAA) today commended the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) for its affirmative injury determination in the Global Safeguard petition filed by the coalition in September. The affirmative determination signifies the ITC’s recognition of the serious injury caused by a surge of quartz surface imports entering the United States from around the globe.

QMAA Logo

“Today’s ITC injury determination is a great step forward for American quartz manufacturing and the 100,000 American jobs this industry supports,” remarked Luke Meisner, Counsel for QMAA. “With foreign quartz imports representing nearly 90% of the U.S. market, we are confident that the ITC will recommend that the President take decisive action in the coming weeks.”

“We applaud today’s ITC injury determination that recognizes the negative impact of the flood of foreign quartz surface products coming into our country,” said Cambria CEO Marty Davis. “These quartz imports don’t just put slab manufacturers at risk, they also steal business from downstream American fabricators. Now is the time to stop the cheating. Free and fair trade, and a level playing field is all that U.S. manufacturers desire.”

“Today, when I walk through the plant, I see uncertainty and fear in the eyes of employees who worry they may be next to be let go,” remarked Daniel Vaz De Melo Sa, Business Development Manager of Guidoni USA. “The ITC’s injury determination marks significant progress towards saving this great American manufacturing industry.”

“Our industry is at risk without safeguard measures in place,” remarked Michael Morici, Vice President of Surfaces at LX Hausys America. “Thanks to the ITC’s vote, we are one step closer to saving American quartz jobs and remain committed to reinvestment and growth.”

The domestic quartz manufacturing industry supports over 100,000 American jobs across the country. These jobs are in jeopardy due to the flood of unfairly traded imports from nations such as India, Thailand, Vietnam, and Malaysia, which is why QMAA filed a Global Safeguard petition to initiate this case.

About the Quartz Manufacturing Alliance for America
QMAA is a coalition of U.S.-based, American quartz slab manufacturing factories, united with other industry leaders to support and strengthen the American quartz industry. QMAA is committed to ensuring a free and fair, competitive marketplace born of free enterprise that provides the opportunity to compete on a level playing field for American quartz slab manufacturing factories and their valued workers. We also believe this effort will have a positive impact throughout the entire quartz surfacing industry, including to the strong benefit of American stone fabrication shops and upstream suppliers of quartz minerals and resin. Learn more at: https://www.qmaa.org/

Source link

Is CSL’s US$3 Billion US Manufacturing Push Altering The Investment Case For CSL (ASX:CSL)?

• Earlier this month, CSL broke ground on a major expansion of its Kankakee, Illinois manufacturing facility, aiming to boost plasma-derived therapy and albumin output using its patented Horizon 2 process while adding at least 300 new pharmaceutical roles and about 800 construction jobs.
• This multiyear U.S. build-out, part of more than US$3.00 billion invested in American operations since 2018, signals CSL’s intention to deepen its U.S. manufacturing base and improve plasma efficiency to support longer-term therapy supply.
• We’ll now examine how this large-scale U.S. manufacturing expansion, built around CSL’s Horizon 2 technology, could influence the company’s investment narrative.

The future of work is here. Discover the 32 top robotics and automation stocks leading the charge in AI-driven automation and industrial transformation.

CSL Investment Narrative Recap

To own CSL, you need to believe its plasma and specialty therapies portfolio can translate operational improvements into healthier margins after a tough stretch of lower profitability and share price underperformance. The Kankakee Horizon 2 expansion supports the longer term efficiency story, but it does not materially change the near term focus on cost control, execution on new product launches, and the risk that rising collection and manufacturing costs keep pressuring margins.

The recent Kankakee expansion update ties most closely to CSL’s broader manufacturing and cost transformation efforts, including the multiyear US$0.5 billion savings program targeting better plasma collection and processing efficiency. Together with initiatives like Horizon 2, these moves sit at the heart of the main positive catalyst for the stock: whether CSL can convert process improvements into sustainably higher gross margins while managing risks from price competition, regulatory shifts and the planned Seqirus demerger.

Yet investors should be aware that rising plasma costs and lower recent profit margins could still weigh on CSL if…

Read the full narrative on CSL (it’s free!)

CSL’s narrative projects $18.1 billion revenue and $4.2 billion earnings by 2028.

Uncover how CSL’s forecasts yield a A$205.16 fair value, a 52% upside to its current price.

Exploring Other Perspectives

ASX:CSL 1-Year Stock Price Chart

Some of the lowest ranked analysts were assuming only about 2.9 percent annual revenue growth to roughly US$16.9 billion and earnings around US$3.7 billion, which is far more cautious than the consensus and could be challenged or reinforced by how effectively CSL’s Kankakee build and wider efficiency plans actually improve margins over time.

Explore 18 other fair value estimates on CSL – why the stock might be worth over 2x more than the current price!

The Verdict Is Yours

Don’t just follow the ticker – dig into the data and build a conviction that’s truly your own.

Ready For A Different Approach?

Our top stock finds are flying under the radar-for now. Get in early:

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data
and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your
financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data.
Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material.
Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

New: AI Stock Screener & Alerts

Our new AI Stock Screener scans the market every day to uncover opportunities.

• Dividend Powerhouses (3%+ Yield)
• Undervalued Small Caps with Insider Buying
• High growth Tech and AI Companies

Or build your own from over 50 metrics.

Explore Now for Free

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

Source link

The Missing Layer in U.S. Manufacturing Readiness: Rahul Kumar Thatikonda’s Case for Overlay Interoperability

The Readiness Gap Behind Modern Manufacturing

American manufacturing has spent years improving visibility across supply chains, procurement networks, and production systems. But visibility alone does not guarantee readiness. In many continuity-sensitive environments, the harder problem begins after new information arrives. Supplier instability, material shortages, severe weather, government restrictions, and conflict-related sourcing disruptions can all affect whether production remains on track. Yet in many organizations, those signals still emerge outside the purchasing, inventory, planning, and operations systems that govern daily decisions.

That gap has become harder to ignore. Modern disruption moves faster than many industrial systems were built to handle. Even when companies can detect risk, they may still struggle to translate that information into a procurement adjustment, a supplier-readiness review, or a planning action that can be tracked, escalated, and governed inside existing workflows. In practice, the weakness is often not the absence of data. It is the absence of a practical layer that can turn new information into reviewable operational action.

For large manufacturers, that problem is not theoretical. Many still rely on older enterprise environments that remain deeply embedded in procurement, inventory control, planning, and fulfillment. Replacing those systems outright is often expensive, operationally risky, and slow. The more urgent question is whether the systems companies already depend on can be made more responsive to the kinds of disruption signals that increasingly shape continuity and readiness.

Why Visibility Alone Is Not Enough

The industrial conversation around resilience often emphasizes forecasting, dashboards, and visibility platforms. Those tools can help identify risk, but they do not solve the harder operational problem on their own. A signal is only useful if it reaches the workflow where action can actually be taken.

That is the missing layer in many manufacturing environments: not data collection, but operational translation. A weather event may threaten inbound logistics. A supplier delay may change material availability. A government restriction may affect sourcing or delivery. But unless that information can be connected to the systems that control purchasing, planning, and operations, the organization may still respond too late.

This is one reason legacy dependence remains a serious issue across large enterprises. In practice, many organizations cannot pause operations for a full modernization effort every time new categories of risk emerge. They need ways to work with the infrastructure they already have. That makes interoperability more than a technical convenience. It becomes part of how readiness is preserved under stress.

A Systems-Focused Background

Rahul Kumar Thatikonda is a digital transformation leader whose work focuses on industrial AI, enterprise interoperability, decision-support systems, orchestration frameworks, and supply-chain resilience in legacy-heavy operating environments. He earned a Master of Science in Business Analytics & Project Management from the University of Connecticut School of Business in 2018, and additional information about his technical work and publications is available through his public research profiles.

His technical record has centered on a recurring problem in large organizations: how to make new operationally important information usable inside older systems that were never designed to absorb it quickly. Public technical materials associated with his research include work on orchestration for ERP-connected environments, readiness protocols, resilient interoperability, and industrial risk modeling.

That focus matters because large manufacturers do not operate in abstract digital environments. They operate through embedded workflows, existing system constraints, and decision chains that often cannot be redesigned overnight. In that context, the most valuable technical work is not always the loudest or the most futuristic. It is often the work that makes real systems more usable under real conditions.

An Overlay Approach to Industrial Readiness

At the center of Thatikonda’s work is a reusable overlay interoperability framework intended to help manufacturing organizations use incoming disruption-related information without requiring full replacement of their core systems. The approach is designed to connect signals such as supplier delays, shortages, weather events, restrictions, logistics interruptions, and sourcing disruptions to existing workflows and convert them into reviewable, trackable actions. Those actions may include risk alerts, supplier-readiness prompts, procurement adjustments, and other controlled interventions that allow personnel to respond earlier and with greater clarity.

That distinction matters. Much of the discussion around industrial AI still falls into one of two categories: ambitious modernization programs that are difficult to implement at scale, or analytics layers that increase visibility without changing operational response. Thatikonda’s framework sits in a more practical middle ground. The point is not simply to generate more alerts or more predictions. It is to make incoming disruption information usable inside legacy purchasing, inventory, planning, and operational systems without forcing companies to abandon the systems they already use.

In that sense, the work is about more than software integration. It is about interoperability as a readiness discipline. The underlying premise is that organizations need a governed way to translate fragmented external signals into workflow actions that can be reviewed, tracked, and acted upon before disruption escalates into a larger continuity problem.

From Architecture to Early Validation

What gives this work more weight than a purely conceptual model is that it has already been formalized through technical documentation, public dissemination, and architecture-level development. Publicly available materials associated with Thatikonda’s work include technical reports and protocol documents on AI-enabled order-to-cash acceleration, readiness frameworks, orchestration for ERP-connected systems, and resilient interoperability design. 

Those materials suggest a pattern that matters in industrial systems work: the contribution is being documented in a way that allows outside readers to assess the architecture, not merely hear broad claims about it. In fields where many ideas remain internal to organizations, that level of technical explanation helps separate a defined framework from a general business concept.

The record also suggests that the framework has been shaped by experience in large enterprise settings where interoperability, workflow control, and cross-system orchestration matter. The most careful way to read that background is not as proof that every implementation question has already been solved, but as evidence that the framework has been informed by practical operating conditions rather than abstract software theory alone. That is an important distinction in manufacturing, where pilot results and architecture discipline often matter more than broad claims of disruption.

A further sign of seriousness is that the work has also been formalized through patent-related development covering orchestration, interoperability, and resilient deployment architecture.  This does not by itself establish adoption, nor should it be read that way. What it does suggest is that the contribution is being developed as a defined technical framework with enough coherence to support formalization, scrutiny, and continued refinement.

Why the United States Needs This Work

The significance of this kind of work lies less in broad claims about artificial intelligence and more in its relevance to continuity-sensitive industrial environments. In sectors where production readiness and supply continuity matter, earlier and more controlled operational response can make a meaningful difference. The challenge is not simply whether risk can be detected. It is whether organizations can absorb that information into the systems that still drive decisions.

That is part of what makes overlay interoperability an important idea at this moment. Many manufacturers in the United States are operating in a world where disruption signals are increasing, but infrastructure replacement cycles remain slow. Under those conditions, practical modernization may depend less on rebuilding everything from the ground up and more on making existing systems more capable of using the information modern disruption keeps generating.

This is where Thatikonda’s work has broader relevance, particularly in supporting the objectives of the Department of Defense’s National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS). It addresses a recurring problem faced by large companies across aerospace, defense-related, and other critical manufacturing settings… The United States needs more work in this category because industrial resilience does not depend only on high-level policy goals, domestic capacity, or supplier diversification mandates. It also depends on whether organizations can act on operationally relevant information in time to reduce downstream shortages, delays, and production instability. A practical framework that helps companies use that information inside the systems they already operate addresses a real implementation gap in American manufacturing readiness.

A More Practical Model of Resilience

Industrial resilience is often discussed in sweeping terms: digital transformation, predictive intelligence, next-generation manufacturing. Those themes matter, but they can obscure a more immediate operational truth. Many of the systems that still run large organizations were not built to absorb today’s disruption signals in real time, and many companies cannot afford to replace them overnight.

That reality is what makes a practical overlay model compelling. Instead of assuming that resilience must begin with total replacement, it starts from the conditions large organizations actually face: layered systems, embedded workflows, long modernization cycles, and the need for earlier, better-governed decisions under uncertainty.

Thatikonda’s work suggests that one of the most important advances in manufacturing readiness may not come from starting over, but from building disciplined ways to make existing systems more responsive under stress. If that approach continues to mature across critical manufacturing settings, it could help define a more realistic path for continuity, responsiveness, and industrial readiness in the United States.

For additional technical and publication records associated with Rahul Kumar Thatikonda, readers may refer to his ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1234-7915



Source link