Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 01/25/2024 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: November 14, 2022

According to the Complaint, Core Scientific Inc. is a blockchain computing data center provider and digital asset mining company. It mines digital assets for its own account and provides hosting services for other large-scale miners.

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, due in part to the expiration of a favorable pricing agreement, the Company was experiencing increasing power costs; (2) that the Company’s largest customer, Gryphon, lacked the financial resources to purchase the necessary miner rigs for Core Scientific to host; (3) that the Company was not providing hosting services to Celsius as required by their contract; (4) that the Company had implemented an improper surcharge to pass through power costs to Celsius; (5) that, as a result of the foregoing alleged breaches of contract, the Company was reasonably likely to incur liability to defend itself against Celsius; (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company’s profitability would be adversely impacted; (7) that, as a result, there was likely substantial doubt as to the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern; and (8) as a result, Defendants’ statements about its business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked reasonable basis at all relevant times.

On December 27, 2022, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the claims against the Company Issuer Defendant.

On March 7, 2023, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on May 5. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint on June 20. On December 20, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The claims that were dismissed by the Order were dismissed without prejudice.

Protected Content


Please Log In or Sign Up for a free account to access restricted features of the Clearinghouse website, including the Advanced Search form and the full case pages.

When you sign up, you will have the option to save your search queries performed on the Advanced Search form.