According to the Complaint, Lizhi Inc. operates a social audio platform for user-generated content in China.
On August 6, 2019, Lizhi filed with the SEC a confidential draft registration statement on Form F-1, which, incorporating and in combination with related documents on Form F-6, and filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4), would be used for the IPO following a series of amendments in response to SEC comments. Following subsequent amendments, the registration statement was declared effective on January 16, 2020 (the “Registration Statement”). Thereafter, on January 17, 2020, Lizhi filed a prospectus for the IPO on Form 424B4, which incorporated and formed part of the Registration Statement (the “Prospectus” and with the Registration Statement, the “Offering Documents”).
The Complaint alleges that the Registration Statement contained false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) at the time of the IPO, the coronavirus was already ravaging China, the home base, principal market, and significant hub for Lizhi, its employees, and its customers; (2) the complications associated with the coronavirus were already negatively affecting Lizhi’s business, as employees and customers contracted the virus, lost employment, or otherwise experienced difficulty in generating, publishing, and monetizing the content critical to Lizhi’s platform; (3) even prior to the IPO, Lizhi employees and customers complained of, and to, Lizhi, which harmed the Company’s reputation and financial condition and prospects; and (4) as a result, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times.
On April 28, 2021, the Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation ("R&R") that the Court grant Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel and lead plaintiff. On June 7, the Court adopted the R&R in its entirety as the opinion of the Court. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on August 7. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint on January 3, 2022.
On September 30, 2022, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The case was dismissed with prejudice.
