|Court:||United States District Court for the Northern District of California|
|Class Period:||05/10/2017 - 11/14/2018|
|Case Leaders:||Jeroen van Kwawegen, Jonathan D. Uslaner|
|Case Team:||Michael Mathai, Lauren M. Cruz|
This is a securities class action lawsuit filed against NVIDIA Corporation (“NVIDIA” or the “Company”), and certain of its executives (collectively, “Defendants”). The action asserts claims under 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, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5, on behalf of investors who purchased NVIDIA’s stock between May 10, 2017, and November 14, 2018, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendants violated provisions of the Exchange Act by issuing false and misleading press releases, filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), and statements during investor and analyst conference calls.
NVIDIA designs, develops, and markets graphics processing units (“GPUs”) and related software. Although traditionally used in connection with computer gaming, demand for the Company’s GPUs surged as NVIDIA’s GPUs became widely used in connection with cryptocurrencies. Given the volatility in the cryptocurrency market, the Company’s ability to adapt to the ever-changing cryptocurrency landscape was critical to investors.
Throughout the Class Period, Defendants assured investors that the Company followed the market closely and could adjust to rapid changes in the cryptocurrency markets. Even as analysts increasingly began to question the Company’s ability to manage inventory in the face of an uncertain cryptocurrency market, Defendants touted that NVIDIA and its executives are “masters at managing our channel, and we understand the channel very well.” NVIDIA also repeatedly assured investors that surging demand for GPUs among cryptocurrency miners would not have a negative impact on the Company because of strong demand for GPUs by NVIDIA’s core customer base of computer gamers. As a result of these misrepresentations, NVIDIA shares traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period.
The truth began to be disclosed on August 16, 2018, when NVIDIA lowered its revenue guidance for the third quarter of 2018 and reported that it no longer expected a meaningful contribution from cryptocurrency miners for the remainder of the year. NVIDIA also reported that its GPU inventory had ballooned by over 30% from the prior quarter, which investors feared could be a sign of slowing demand for NVIDIA’s GPUs. Then, on November 15, 2018, NVIDIA significantly cut its revenue guidance for the fiscal fourth quarter, revealing that revenue would decline by over 7% in the quarter. NVIDIA attributed its poor financial results to surging inventory of midrange GPUs that built up in the channel before the rapid fade of cryptocurrency mining. As a result of these disclosures, the price of the Company’s stock declined significantly.
On May 2, 2019, the Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., of the Northern District of California, appointed E. Öhman J:or Fonder AB (“Öhman Fonder”) and Stichting Pensioenfonds PGB (“PGB”) as Co-Lead Plaintiffs, and Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP as Co-Lead Counsel, in the action. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated class action complaint on June 21, 2019. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, and Plaintiffs opposed their motion. On March 16, 2020, the district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, but permitted Lead Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint.
Lead Plaintiffs filed their amended complaint on May 13, 2020. Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. On March 2, 2021, after briefing and argument on Defendants’ motion, the district court dismissed the amended complaint.
Lead Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 25, 2023, after briefing and oral argument, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of the amended complaint, concluding that a series of false and misleading statements by Defendants NVIDIA and its CEO support a claim under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5. The Ninth Circuit’s decision can be found under the Case Documents header on this page.
- Events BLB&G Partner Katie Sinderson to Appear as Guest Panelist at Skadden Arp’s 16th Annual Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Update December 5, 2023 Learn More
- Events BLB&G Partner Jeroen van Kwawegen to Serve as Panelist at Columbia Law School Conference on M&A and Corporate Governance December 1, 2023 Learn More
- Events BLB&G Senior Counsel Jai Chandrasekhar to Speak at Annual Asia Pacific Association for Fiduciary Studies Conference November 29, 2023 Learn More
- Publications “SEC administrative enforcement process called into question, highlighting importance of private actions” by Jonathan D. Uslaner and Chloe Jasper Published in Reuters November 27, 2023 Learn More
- Publications “‘Optimizing’ and Match: Bad Policy Threatens to Drive Bad Law” by Gregory Varallo, Andrew Blumberg, and James Janison Published by Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance November 13, 2023 Learn More