Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 10/02/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: September 15, 2020

According to the Complaint, Nikola Corporation purports to operate as an integrated zero emissions transportation systems provider which designs and manufactures battery-electric and hydrogen-electric vehicles, electric vehicle drivetrains, vehicle components, energy storage systems, and hydrogen fueling station infrastructure.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) VectoIQ did not engage in proper due diligence regarding its merger with Nikola; (2) Nikola overstated its “in-house” design, manufacturing, and testing capabilities; (3) Nikola overstated its hydrogen production capabilities; (4) as a result, Nikola overstated its ability to lower the cost of hydrogen fuel; (5) Nikola's founder and Executive Chairman tweeted a misleading “test” video of the Company’s Nikola Two truck; (6) the work experience and background of key Nikola employees had been overstated and obfuscated; (7) Nikola did not have five Tre trucks completed; and (8) as a result, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Auto & Truck Manufacturers
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: NKLA
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: D. Arizona
DOCKET #: 20-CV-01797
JUDGE: Hon. Steven P Logan
DATE FILED: 09/15/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/03/2020
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/15/2020
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (NY)
  2. Tiffany & Bosco, P.A.
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available