Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 04/14/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: October 24, 2019

According to the Complaint, Zendesk, Inc. is a San Francisco, California-based software development company that provides SaaS products for organizations.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants disseminated materially false and misleading statements to the investing public and failed to disclose adverse facts pertaining to the Company’s business, operations, and financial results. Specifically, the Complaint alleges the Company concealed material information and/or failed to disclose that: (a) Zendesk’s clients had been subject to data breaches dating back to 2016; (b) Zendesk was experiencing slowing demand for its SaaS offerings, particularly in Germany, the United Kingdom, and Australia, due in large part to political uncertainty and China trade issues there; and (c) as a result of the foregoing, Zendesk’s business metrics and financial prospects were not as strong as Defendants had led the market to believe during the Class Period.

On January 24, 2020, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases and appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated amended Complaint on April 14.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ZEN
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-06968
JUDGE: Hon.Charles R. Breyer
DATE FILED: 10/24/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/06/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/01/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Johnson Fistel, LLP
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (New SF Office)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 19-CV-06968
JUDGE: Hon.Charles R. Breyer
DATE FILED: 04/14/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/06/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/01/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (New SF Office)
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available