Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 08/09/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: January 18, 2019

According to the Complaint, Activision Blizzard develops and distributes content and services on video game consoles, personal computers (PC), and mobile devices. The Company was formed in July 2008 as the result of a merger between Activision, Inc. and Vivendi Games, the holding company for the video game studio Blizzard Entertainment.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the termination of Activision Blizzard and Bungie Inc.’s partnership, giving Bungie full publishing rights and responsibilities for the Destiny franchise, was imminent; (ii) the termination of the two companies’ relationship would foreseeably have a significant negative impact on Activision Blizzard’s revenues; and (iii) as a result, Activision Blizzard’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

This case was voluntarily dismissed on March 29, 2019. A related case continues under Docket 19-CV-03788.

On June 10, 2019, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated Complaint on July 10.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ATVI
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 19-CV-00423
JUDGE: Hon. Manuel L. Real
DATE FILED: 01/18/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/02/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/10/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 19-CV-03788
JUDGE: Hon. Manuel L. Real
DATE FILED: 07/10/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/02/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/10/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available