Lawsuit Overview
March 02, 2021 - An investor in shares of Velodyne Lidar, Inc. (NASDAQ: VLDR) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Velodyne Lidar, Inc. in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between November 9, 2020 and February 19, 2021.
San Jose, CA based Velodyne Lidar, Inc. develops and produces lidar sensors for use in industrial, 3D mapping, drones, and auto applications in North America, the Asia Pacific, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.
On February 22, 2021, Velodyne announced in a press release that it was immediately replacing David Hall, the Company's founder and former Chairman of the Board of Directors, and Marta Thoma Hall, the Company's former Chief Marketing Officer. An investigation by the Audit Committee had “concluded that Mr. Hall and Ms. Hall each behaved inappropriately with regard to certain Board and Company processes, and failed to operate with respect, honesty, integrity, and candor in their dealings with Company officers and directors.” In addition, Velodyne’s Board of Directors formally censured Mr. Hall and Ms. Hall. Shares of Velodyne Lidar, Inc. (NASDAQ: VLDR) declined from $26.74 per share on January 27, 2021, to $14.00 per share on February 26, 2021. According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Velodyne Lidar, Inc. (NASDAQ: VLDR) common shares between November 9, 2020 and February 19, 2021, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws. More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between November 9, 2020 and February 19, 2021, the Defendants failed to disclose to investors that certain of Velodyne’s directors had failed to operate with respect, honesty, integrity, and candor in their dealings with the Company’s officers and directors, that the Company was investigating the foregoing matters, and that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked reasonable basis at all relevant times.