Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

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

Filing Date: August 07, 2019

According to the Complaint, 2U is an education technology company that works with universities to provide
online graduate programs and certificates for working adults.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company faced increasing competition in online education and particularly regarding graduate programs; (2) that the Company faced certain program-specific issues that negatively impacted its performance; (3) that, as a result, the Company’s business model was not sustainable; (4) that the Company would slow its program launches; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: TWOU
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 19-CV-07390
JUDGE: Hon. Ronnie Abrams
DATE FILED: 08/07/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/25/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/30/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available