Securities Litigation

Subscribe to Securities Litigation

In my recent review of the 1H24 securities class action litigation filings (here), I noted that SPAC-related securities suits were less of a factor in the overall number of suit filings during the year’s first six months than they had been in recent years. However, even though the peak of the SPAC frenzy was several years ago now, SPAC-related securities suits are continuing to be filed. The latest example is the SPAC-related securities suit filed late last week against SeaStar Medical Holding Corporation, which is the product of a 2022 SPAC merger. The new lawsuit has several interesting features, as discussed below. A copy of the July 5, 2024, complaint in the lawsuit can be found here.Continue Reading Medical Device Company Hit with SPAC-Related Securities Lawsuit

Just weeks before trial in the case was scheduled to being, the parties to the Under Armor securities class action lawsuit have agreed to settle the case for $434 million, according a company SEC filing. The case had recently survived the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. According to the lead plaintiffs’ counsel, the settlement represents the second-largest securities suit settlement in the Fourth Circuit. The settlement is subject to court approval. A copy of the company’s June 21, 2023, filing on Form 8-K can be found here. Plaintiffs’ counsel’s June 21, 2024, press release about the settlement can be found here.Continue Reading Under Armour Securities Suit Settles for $434 Million

Just days after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica securities case concerning risk factor disclosures (as discussed here), the Court has now agreed to take up yet another securities case, this time in a case involving Nvidia and involving the standards for pleading scienter and falsity under the PSLRA. The NVIDIA case involves alleged fraud in connection with the company’s disclosures concerning its sales of graphics processing units (GPU) to cryptocurrency companies as a component of its overall GPU sales. The specific questions the case presents to the Supreme Court concern what and how a plaintiff must plead when pleading scienter and falsity. Because the case involves the PSLRA’s “exacting pleading requirements,” the case potentially could prove to be very significant. A copy of the Court’s June 17, 2024 Order granting the petition for writ of certiorari can be found here.Continue Reading Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up Nvidia Securities Suit On Pleading Standards Issues

In the following guest post, Ed Whitworth, the Head of Financial Lines at Inigo, and Yera Patel, Chief Legal officer and Head of Financial Lines Claims for Inigo, summarize the results of a recent survey Inigo conducted of U.S. securities litigation defense counsel. The original of the survey summary previously was published on Inigo’s blog, here. I would like to thank Ed, Yera, and Inigo for allowing me to publish the report summary on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to the blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is the authors’ article. Continue Reading Guest Post: Inigo’s 2024 Defense Counsel Survey

One of the procedural innovations the PSLRA introduced was the requirement that plaintiffs’ counsel who file a securities class action lawsuit complaint must issue a press release announcing the complaint’s filing and notifying prospective class members of the opportunity to seek to become lead plaintiff. Plaintiffs’ lawyers quickly realized the potential publicity value for them…

Assen Koev

The resolution of many securities class action lawsuits would benefit from an economic assessment early in the case process. In the following guest post, Assen Koev argues in favor of a standardization of the initial economic assessment analysis as a way to provide the parties and concerned insurers with a clearer picture of the securities lawsuit at an earlier point in the case. Assen is an economic consultant and founder of SCA iPortal. A version of this article previously was published on Law360. I would like to thank Assen for allowing to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this site’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Assen’s article.Continue Reading Guest Post: Standardizing Early Case Appraisal in Securities Class Actions

Here at The D&O Diary, we read everything so you don’t have to. One item that crossed my desk this week particularly resonated with me. The specific item was the court’s dismissal motion grant in the securities class action lawsuit pending against the footwear and apparel company Allbirds.

The plaintiffs had tried to argue that by their use in their complaint of bold and italicized font they had indicated which of the defendants’ statements they (the plaintiffs) alleged to be false and misleading. The court said it could not discern from the plaintiffs’ typography what statements or portions or statements were supposed to be misleading and granted the defendants’ dismissal motion with leave for the plaintiffs to attempt to replead. While the ruling could be only a setback for the plaintiffs, there arguably are some lessons here for all of us that should not be overlooked.Continue Reading Boldface and Italics Not Enough to Identify Misleading Statements

One of the more distinctive developments in the capital markets in recent years has been the rise in the number of very large private companies. These companies are sometimes referred to as “unicorns,” as if they are very rare creatures — but the reality is that worldwide there over 1,230 of them.  Because the rise of so many large private companies is relatively recent, many of the legal principles and procedures relevant to these companies are just forming – giving rise to what University of Illinois Law Professor Verity Winship describes as the “gaps between private-market reality and legal structures that were designed for public companies.”

Among the “uncharted areas” is shareholder litigation; in a new paper, Professor Winship considers what shareholder litigation has meant in the context of these unicorn companies. What she found is that shareholder litigation involving these companies is rare, and that the procedural mechanisms available to investors are limited, at least by comparison to the mechanisms available to public company investors. Professor Winship describes her paper in an April 25, 2024,  Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance post entitled “Unicorn Shareholder Suits” (here). The paper itself can be found here.  Continue Reading Unicorn Companies and Securities Litigation