According to the Complaint, ViewRay, Inc. designs, manufactures, and markets the MRIdian radiation therapy system, which employs MRI-based technology to provide real-time imaging that differentiates the targeted tumor from the surrounding soft tissue and other critical organs during radiation treatment.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants issued materially false and misleading statements that failed to disclose adverse facts concerning the Company’s business, operations and financial results. Specifically, the Complaint alleges: (a) that demand for ViewRay systems had declined due in part to changes being made to Medicare reimbursement approaches first announced in November 2019 that could make purchases of new ViewRay systems less profitable for customers; (b) that the Company’s reported backlog was overstated due to the inclusion of orders with insufficient surety as to permit for their inclusion in reported backlog; and (c) that as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about ViewRay’s business metrics and financial prospects during the Class Period were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On December 19, 2019, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on February 28, 2020. Lead Plaintiff filed a second amended Complaint on September 2. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the second amended Complaint on September 16. On August 25, 2021, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The case was dismissed with prejudice.

Lead Plaintiff filed a notice appealing the Court's Dismissal Order on September 17, 2021. On September 22, 2022, the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's ruling.