In re Lyft Inc. Securities Litigation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 4, 20204:19-cv-02690California4,459 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 In re LYFT SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No. 19-cv-02690-HSG

ORDER GRANTING KEINER'S

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT AS

LEAD PLAINTIFF AND DENYING

THE REMAINING MOTIONS FOR

LEAD PLAINTIFF Re: Dkt. Nos. 9, 12,

12 On May 17, 2019, Plaintiff Matias Malig, as Trustee for the Malig Family Trust, filed the 13 first of two securities class action lawsuits bringing claims individually and on behalf of others 14 who acquired common stock of Lyft, Inc. (“Lyft” or “the Company”) traceable to Lyft’s Initial 15 Public Offering (“IPO”) on March 28, 2019. Dkt. No. 1 (“Malig Compl.”). The complaint 16 asserts a claim under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), 15 U.S.C. 17 § 77k. Compl. ¶¶ 91–98. The complaint names as Defendants the Company, eleven individual 18 defendants who served in executive positions for the Company or on the Company’s Board, and 19 twenty-nine underwriters who were…

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.