Ostrander

Ostrander v. Teradata Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 7, 20243:24-cv-01034California1,620 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VINCENT OSTRANDER, individually Case No. 24-cv-01034-BAS-MSB and on behalf of all others similarly 12 situated, ORDER: 13 Plaintiff, (1) GRANTING BRIAN JURKO’S 14 v. MOTION TO APPOINT LEAD PLAINTIFF AND TERADATA CORPORATION, et al.,

APPROVE CO-LEAD

16 Defendants. COUNSEL (ECF No. 3); AND 17 (2) DENYING AS MOOT

VINCENT OSTRANDER’S

MOTION TO APPOINT

LEAD PLAINTIFF AND

APPROVE LEAD COUNSEL

(ECF No. 4) 22

This case is a putative securities class action brought on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Teradata Corporation securities between February 13, 2023, and February 12, 2024. (Compl. ¶ 1, ECF No. 1.) The Complaint alleges Teradata and its executive officers made false or misleading statements about the company’s 28 financials, causing significant losses to class members …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.