Facts

Plaintiffs William Baker, Jill Sligay, Lenard Roque, and Amolkumar Vaidya brought a putative securities class action against Twitter, Inc., and certain of its former officers (Jack Dorsey, Ned Segal, Parag Agrawal, and Damien Kieran), following a high-profile cyberattack. Plaintiffs alleged Defendants made materially false and misleading statements about Twitter's cybersecurity, data-privacy, and user-metric practices. The Court dismissed Plaintiffs' original amended complaint with leave to amend, but "caution[ed] [Lead Plaintiff] against refiling a complaint that is unduly burdensome or needlessly complex."

In October 2023, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint exceeding a hundred pages that again challenged various cybersecurity, data-privacy, foreign-interference, and user-metric statements.

Result

The Court dismissed Plaintiffs' amended pleading with prejudice, holding Plaintiffs "provided no new facts" to cure the prior deficiencies. In particular, the Court held that most of the statements challenged by Plaintiffs were not false or misleading or supported by particular facts showing a strong inference of scienter, and that plaintiffs failed to plead what "corrective" information was made public (i.e., loss causation). The Court found no cause to allow further leave to amend, explaining that "[s]ifting through the TAC only to find Lead Plaintiff had provided no new facts, just new theories, was a waste of judicial resources--and, no doubt, the resources of the opposing parties." Plaintiffs did not appeal the decision.