Here are some additions to the earlier replies around Gapology and TA more generally:
Basically, all of the science (<-- a very, very loose term in this context) of TA (Technical Analysis) is based around pattern recognition of price (and volume) charts as a proxy for group (market) psychology and the various behaviours that can, and often do, stem from that. This includes the concepts of how gaps arise and how the market treats them in due course.
The reason why there are so very many different TA methods and principles is because it's a crude attempt to track the vast complexity of (past) group psychology and project it (price action) into the future. More often than not it is just plain wrong. That's why there are so many differing/competing methods out there. That said, there are times in which one or other subset of TA (take you pick) works exceptionally well... until a sufficient number of market participants cotton-on or the broader mood shifts, and then it doesn't. Put another way, the market experiences various moods (psych) at different points in time that will more closely align with one particular flavour of TA than another during that period. When the mood shifts, more often than not, so will the flavour of TA that best describes it.
Depending on the chosen charting time frame, I can show you unfilled gaps around ~$5.00 and ~$4.30 to the upside and also some (extreme examples of) gaps around ~7-9c (yes, cents) to the downside. All of those gaps have zero predictive power. That said, I'd like to think that there's a much greater chance of those higher levels getting taken out at some point in the future as the company grows and the underlying fundamentals around the Li sector improve over time. Rest assured that, like night follows day, if/when those upside price levels get hit there will be more than one Gapologist who will espouse that it happened because it was written in the stars price charts, rather than having anything to do with the real world (FA).
Think of FA (Fundamental Analysis) as the current which drives all fish (market participants) in a particular direction. TA is an attempt to put a decision-making framework around when and how a given shoal of fish will school at various points of time as they are carried along by the broader current (i.e. assessing the noise within the broader trend).
Proof-reading this before posting potentially makes me sound like a TA hater. I'm not. I do keep one eye on a couple of favoured TA indicators, but only as pulse-taking tools of the current mood. Certainly nothing to hang my hat on for decision-making or trade execution. Because, just like a schooling shoal of fish can change direction in a heartbeat, so too can the market's ST mood.
The real question becomes whether the broader current (FA) has actually changed direction.
I know I've indulged in a broader answer to your question, but I thought it was worthwhile putting it all into context.
TL;DR: There are no sacred cows in TA. Unlike physics, there are no absolutes (i.e. things that 'must' happen). Given TA's roots in mass psychology, the best that it can offer is 'mights', 'maybes', or 'possibles'.
(20min delay)