Equinix, Inc. Summary: According to the press release dated March 04, 2011, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and financial results. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that Equinix was having difficulty with the integration of Switch & Data Corporation Facilities Company (acquired in April 2010) into its operations due to a decline in bookings prior to the close of the acquisition and due to the Company’s aggressive synergy plan. Defendants further continuously hyped demand for the Company’s colocation services as being robust and failed to disclose that the Company’s business model was not working and was causing the Company to experience increased churn and pricing pressure on its collocation services. As a result of defendants’ false statements, Equinix’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $105.09 per share on October 5, 2010.
After the market closed on October 5, 2010, Equinix issued a press release announcing revised third quarter and fiscal year 2010 guidance. The Company reported it expected revenue to be in the range of $328.0 to $330.0 million for the third quarter of 2010. The Company further reported it expected revenues for the full year 2010 to be approximately $1,215.0 million, 1.2% lower than the midpoint of its previous outlook. In addition, the Company announced that it would transition from a demand fulfillment business model to a demand creation model. On this news, Equinix’s stock collapsed $34.75 per share to close at $70.34 per share on October 6, 2010, a one-day decline of over 33% on high volume.
On June 10, 2011, the District Court issued an order after consideration of the unopposed Motion for Administrative Relief to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related and concluded that a separate case related to the current action.
On August 8, 2011, the Court issued an order appointing the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 697 Pension Fund as lead plaintiff and approving their choice of lead counsel.
On September 22, 2011, the Lead Plaintiff filed an amended class action complaint.
On March 2, 2012, the Court issued an order granting defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs' amended complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. On May 2, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint.
On December 5, 2012, the Court issued an order granting defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. Plaintiffs were given leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days of this order. On January 15, 2013, the Plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint.
On June 12, 2013, the Court issued an Order granting the defendants' motion to dismiss with prejudice.
SIC Code: 4813
Industry: Computer Services
WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top