Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 06/10/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: June 07, 2019

According to the Complaint, Cloudera is a data management and software company.

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the Defendants failed to disclose adverse facts pertaining to Cloudera's business, operations, and financial condition, which were known to or recklessly disregarded by Defendants. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose: (i) Cloudera was finding it increasingly difficult to identify large enterprises interested in adopting the Company's Hadoop-based platform; (ii) Cloudera needed to expend an increasing amount of capital on sales and marketing activities to generate new revenues; (iii) Cloudera had materially diminished sales opportunities and prospects and could not generate annual positive cash flows for the foreseeable future; (iv) the primary motivation for the Company's merger with Hortonworks was to generate growth through the acquisition of Hortonworks' existing customers (as opposed to obtaining them organically); and (v) that the purported synergies and other benefits of the merger with Hortonworks were materially overstated.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CLDR
Company Market: New York SE
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 #: 19-CV-03221
JUDGE: Hon. Lucy H. Koh
DATE FILED: 06/07/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/28/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/05/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Johnson Fistel, LLP
    600 West Broadway, Suite 1540, Johnson Fistel, LLP, CA 92101
    619.230.0063 619.230.0063 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available