Legal Opinion
Costanzo v. DXC Technology Company
District Court, N.D. California
Decided December 14, 2021No. 5:19-cv-05794Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 NEIL COSTANZO, ET AL., Case No. 19-cv-05794-BLF 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 9 v. DISMISS THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHOUT LEAVE TO 10 DXC TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, et al., AMEND 11 Defendants. [Re: ECF No. 98] 12 13 Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint. This is 14 a putative class action alleging violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the 15 “Securities Act”). Plaintiffs’ claims pertain to representations in the prospectus and…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Eminence Capital, Llc, and Jay Spechler v. Aspeon, Inc. Richard P. StackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Navarro v. BlockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.