On or around 10/10/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)
Filing Date: October 05, 2016
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Cognizant lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting; (2) certain improper payments were for permits and building licenses for some of its 12 facilities in India; and (3) as a result, defendants’ statements about Cognizant’s business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damage.
On February 3, 2017, the Court appointed Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 7.
"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.
First Identified Complaint
Shane Park, et al. v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation, et al.