Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 08/20/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: August 19, 2020

According to the Complaint, Alteryx, Inc. is a data analytics company that offers a subscription-based platform for customers to access, prepare, and analyze data from a multitude of sources, then deploy and share analytics at scale to make data-driven decisions.

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 was unable to close large deals within the quarter and deals were pushed out to subsequent quarters or downsized; (2) that, as a result, Alteryx increasingly relied on adoption licenses to attract new customers; (3) that, as a result and due to the nature of adoption licenses, the Company’s revenue was reasonably likely to decline; and (4) 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: AYX
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 20-CV-01540
JUDGE: Hon. David O. Carter
DATE FILED: 08/19/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/06/2020
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/06/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP
  2. The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available