Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 08/11/2017 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: August 15, 2016

According to the law firm press release, on October 29, 2015, SolarCity announced that it was lowering its full year 2015 guidance. On this news the Company’s stock price fell $8.42 per share, or 22%, to close at $29.65 on October 30, 2015. Then, on February 9, 2016 the Company disclosed that it fell short of its previously issued fiscal year 2015 installation guidance. On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $7.72 per share, or 29%, to close at $18.63 on February 10, 2016, thereby injuring investors.

The complaint charges SolarCity and certain of its officers with violations of the federal securities laws. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) that demand for the Company’s products was weakening; (2) that the Company was concealing the weakening demand from investors; and (3) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ statements about SolarCity’s business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On January 25, 2017, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on March 20.

On August 11, 2017, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss with leave to amend.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Semiconductors
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SCTY
Company Market: NASDAQ
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 16-CV-04686
JUDGE: Hon. Lucy H. Koh
DATE FILED: 08/15/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/05/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/09/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Wagner Firm
    1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 , The Wagner Firm, CA 90067
    310.491.7949 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 16-CV-04686
JUDGE: Hon. Lucy H. Koh
DATE FILED: 03/20/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/06/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/09/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Newman Ferrara LLP

    ·
  2. Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec LLP
    Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650, Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec LLP, CA 94111
    415.788.4220 415.788.4220 · rschubert@schubertlawfirm.com
No Document Title Filing Date