PDF

CareDx, Inc. Class Action Lawsuit - CDNA

Company Name
CareDx, Inc.
Stock Symbol
CDNA
Class Period
February 24, 2021 to May 5, 2022
Motion Deadline
July 22, 2022
Court
Northern District of California
25 days left to seek lead plaintiff status

Case Summary

The CareDx class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers of CareDx, Inc. (NASDAQ: CDNA) common stock between February 24, 2021 and May 5, 2022, inclusive (the “Class Period”).  The CareDx class action lawsuit – captioned Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union #295 Pension Fund v. CareDx, Inc., No. 22-cv-03023 (N.D. Cal.) – charges CareDx and certain of its top executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the CareDx class action lawsuit, please provide your information by clicking here.  You can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com.  Lead plaintiff motions for the CareDx class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than July 22, 2022.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: CareDx is a diagnostics company that provides services and products to the organ transplant recipient community, offering diagnostic testing services, products, and digital healthcare software for transplant patients and care providers.  During the Class Period, defendants emphasized to investors the success of CareDx’s RemoTraC service – a remote, home-based, blood-drawing service that CareDx launched in response to the COVID-19 pandemic – as part of the “winning formula.”  Investors were told throughout the Class Period that the RemoTraC service was a massive success that gave CareDx the ability to “drive margins” for testing services.

But as the CareDx class action lawsuit alleges, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose that: (i) CareDx had engaged in a variety of improper and illegal schemes to inflate testing services revenue and demand, including pushing a surveillance protocol through inaccurate marketing materials, offering extravagant inducements or kickbacks to physicians and other providers, and improperly bundling expensive testing services with other blood tests as part of the RemoTraC service; (ii) these practices, and others, subjected CareDx to an undisclosed risk of regulatory scrutiny; (iii) these practices rendered CareDx’s testing services revenue reported throughout the Class Period artificially inflated; and (iv) as a result, defendants’ positive statements about CareDx’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased CareDx common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.  A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class.  A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the class action lawsuit.  The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class action lawsuit.  An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. 

ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities fraud cases.  The Firm is ranked #1 on the 2021 ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report for recovering nearly $2 billion for investors last year alone – more than triple the amount recovered by any other plaintiffs’ firm.  With 200 lawyers in 9 offices, Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs’ firms in the world and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest securities class action recovery ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig.

Main Menu