According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, cash position, prospects, and internal controls. Specifically, in November 2015, Defendants: (i) misrepresented that Hortonworks had sufficient cash and cash equivalents to fund 12 months of working capital and capital expenditure needs; (ii) failed to disclose that Hortonworks in actuality lacked adequate cash to meet those working capital and capital expenditure requirements over that period of time; (iii) failed to disclose that, as a result, Defendants were contemplating a significant offering to fund its operations; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On Friday, January 15, 2016, post-market, Hortonworks announced it had retained Goldman Sachs to raise $100 million in a secondary offering. Analysts expressed surprise, with one stating, “We believe it will be incumbent on HDP during its roadshow to show why this offering, announced in this way, at this time, should not be interpreted as evidence of serious difficulty.”
On this news, Hortonworks’s stock fell $6.13, or nearly 37%, to close at $10.44 on January 19, 2016, the next trading day.
On June 1, 2016, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on July 28.
On March 27, 2017, the parties entered into a Stipulation of Settlement. The parties entered into a revised Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement on May 26. On October 10, the Court granted final approval of the Settlement and entered Final Judgment.