Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
July 2, 2021, Decided; July 2, 2021, Filed
Case No. 21-cv-01486-SI
ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, APPOINTING LEAD PLAINTIFF, AND APPOINTING LEAD COUNSEL
Re: Dkt. Nos. 16, 18, 30, 31, 36, 45, 46
Before the Court are seven motions to consolidate cases 21-cv-01486-SI, 21-cv-01736-VC, and 21-cv-01950-JST and seven motions for appointment as lead plaintiff. Dkt. Nos. 16, 18, 30, 31, 36, 45, 46. On July 2, 2021, the Court heard oral argument on the motions. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the motions to consolidate, GRANTS Diane and William Smith's motion to appoint lead plaintiff and lead counsel, and DENIES the remaining motions for appointment as lead plaintiff and lead counsel.
The present matter, 21-cv-1486-SI, arose in connection with statements allegedly issued by Velodyne Lidar, Inc. ("Velodyne"), Anand Gopalan, and Andrew Hamer (collectively "defendants") regarding Velodyne's business operations and financial prospects. Velodyne develops lidar sensor technologies for automated systems and in 2020 became a public entity when it merged with Graf Industrial Corp., a special purpose acquisition company. Dkt. No 1 at ¶ 16.
On March 2, 2021, in 21-cv-1486-SI, plaintiff Meysam [*3] Moradpour filed a securities class action complaint ("Moradpour Action") against Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Anand Gopalan, and Andrew Hamer (collectively "defendants") for alleged violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b) and 78t(a), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5. Dkt. No. 1 at 2. Plaintiff alleges defendants made false or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts to investors during the class period, November 9, 2020 and February 19, 2021. Id. at ¶ 5.
On March 12, 2021, in 3:21-cv-01736-VC, Robert Reese filed a securities class action complaint ("Reese Action") against Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Anand Gopalan, and Andrew Hamer for violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. See Reese v. Velodyne Lidar Inc., Case No. 3:21-cv-01736-VC, Dkt. No. 1 at 2. The Reese Action complaint alleges throughout the class period, November 9, 2020 - February 19, 2021, defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts to investors. Id. at ¶ 5.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124472 *; 2021 WL 2778533
MEYSAM MORADPOUR, Plaintiff, v. VELODYNE LIDAR, INC., et al., Defendants.
appointment, lead plaintiff, consolidate, lead counsel, class period, motions, Lidar, Investor, class action