LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT: A GUIDE FOR INVESTORS TO THE INITIAL STAGES OF THE LAWSUIT

If you suffered losses in LivePerson stock, contact LivePerson stock loss lawyer Timothy L. Miles about a LivePerson class action lawsuit

INTRODUCTION TO THE LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

Contact a LivePerson Stock Loss Lawyer about a LivePerson class action lawsuit

The LivePerson class action lawsuit​ has already started some investor chatter since its recent filing due to implications for both the company's shareholders and the legal landscape. This investor guide will provide an in-depth exploration of the initial stages of the LivePerson class action lawsuit​​, from the filing of the complaint to a decision on class certification, under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA).

---

LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

​​​​​Before getting into discussing the details of the LivePerson lawsuit​, it is crucial to understand the PSLRA and its impact on class action lawsuits such as the LivePerson lawsuit Enacted in 1995, the PSLRA was designed to address perceived abuses in securities class action litigation. The Act introduced several key provisions, including heightened pleading standards and the requirement of a lead plaintiff with a significant financial stake in the case. These provisions aimed to deter frivolous lawsuits and promote transparency in class action litigation.

THE INITIAL STAGES OF THE LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT - FROM FILING TO CERTIFICATION

The LivePerson lawsuit​ began with the filing of a complaint by an investor who alleged that the company made false and/or misleading statements about its financial condition.  Specifically, the LivePerson class action lawsuit​ alleges that LivePerson delivers mobile and online messaging solutions through Conversational Artificial Intelligence.  In February 2022, LivePerson acquired WildHealth, Inc., a precision medicine service, according to the complaint.  The complaint further alleges that in November 2022, unbeknownst to investors, WildHealth received notice that reimbursements for its services rendered under a Medicare demonstration program related to COVID-19 testing (the “Program”) were suspended pending further review.

The LivePerson class action lawsuit​ alleges that defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) LivePerson’s disclosure controls and procedures contained a material weakness; (ii) accordingly, LivePerson maintained deficient internal controls over its financial reporting; (iii) as a result, LivePerson’s third quarter 2022 financial statements failed to disclose the suspension of WildHealth’s Medicare reimbursements in connection with the Program and the resulting negative impact on LivePerson’s future revenues; and (iv) accordingly, LivePerson had overstated its future financial position and/or prospects.
​
The LivePerson class action lawsuit​ further alleges that on February 28, 2023, LivePerson revealed that, as a result of LivePerson’s acquisition of WildHealth, “[LivePerson] requires more time to perform additional review and testing of revenue recognition with respect to a recently discontinued WildHealth program, for which Medicare reimbursement is suspended pending further governmental review, and to complete its in-process review of internal controls and procedures.”  On this news, the price of LivePerson stock fell more than 14%, according to the complaint.

Then, as the complaint further alleges, on March 6, 2023, LivePerson disclosed that “the referenced review of WildHealth revenue is anticipated to affect fourth quarter 2022 revenue attributable to WildHealth’s participation in a Medicare demonstration program, due to suspension in November 2022 of Medicare reimbursements under the program and pending further governmental review.”  The LivePerson class action lawsuit alleges that on this news, the price of LivePerson stock fell nearly 7%.

​Finally, the LivePerson class action lawsuit​ further alleges that on March 16, 2023, LivePerson revealed that “due to certain control deficiencies which aggregated to a material weakness in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting . . ., our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2022” and “[t]he control deficiencies, which in aggregate constitute a material weakness, were identified in connection with the Company’s previously disclosed review of certain transactions related to its subsidiary WildHealth.”  The LivePerson class action lawsuit​ alleges that on this news, the price of LivePerson stock fell nearly 58%.​

CONSOLIDATION AND THE LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE IN THE LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

​When a securities class action is filed such as the LivePerson class action lawsuit, the person who files the first complaint is required to publish a notice announcing the filing. Anyone who wants to be lead plaintiff on behalf of the class in the LivePerson class action lawsuit must thereafter file a motion to be appointed as lead plaintiff(s) no later than 60 days after the notice was published. 

Within 90 days after publication of the notice announcing the filing of the LivePerson class action lawsuit to class members, the court shall consider any motions for lead plaintiff and appoint as lead plaintiff the class member(s) that the court determines to be most capable of adequately representing the interests of class members.  If several similar lawsuits are filed which is typical, and a motion for consolidation is pending, the PSLRA provides that the court shall appoint a lead plaintiff as soon as practicable after rendering its decision on consolidation.

DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

​After appointing lead plaintiff(s) and lead counsel in the LivePerson lawsuit, typically, the court will enter a scheduling order setting a deadline for the filing of a consolidated complaint which shall become the operative pleading and then a deadline for the defendants to file a motion(s) to dismiss the consolidated complaint along with a briefing schedule for the motion.  The PSLRA raised the bar for the plaintiffs in securities class actions which a heightened pleading standard plaintiffs have to meet. Plaintiffs in the LivePerson lawsuit are required to plead with particularity every statement which is alleged to have been false or misleading and the set forth the reasons why those statements were false or misleading. Additionally, for statements based on information and belief, plaintiffs must state with particularly all facts on which that belief is formed. 

If plaintiffs meet their burden and the motion(s) to dismiss are denied, then the case moves to class certification. To obtain class certification in the LivePerson class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs needed to demonstrate that the case meets the criteria outlined in Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This rule requires, among other things, that the class be so numerous that joinder of all members would be impracticable, that there are common questions of law and fact, and that the representative parties adequately represent the interests of the class.

KEY PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE LAWSUIT

​​​​​The LivePerson class action lawsuit involves several key parties, each with distinct roles and interests. The lead plaintiff, typically an institutional investor or a group of investors, represents the class and spearheads the litigation. The defendants, in this case, are LivePerson, the company accused of making false and misleading statements, along with certain of its executive officers. Additionally, the court plays a vital role in overseeing the proceedings and ensuring that the rights of all parties are protected.

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATION OF A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

​To obtain class certification in the LivePerson class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs must meet the legal requirements set forth in Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As previously mentioned, these requirements include numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. Numerosity refers to the size of the class, which must be sufficiently large to make joinder impracticable. Commonality requires that there are questions of law or fact common to the class. Typicality ensures that the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the class. Lastly, adequacy of representation necessitates that the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. Plaintiffs in the LivePerson class action lawsuit must also show that a class action is superior to any other method for resolving the lawsuit and that common questions of law and fact predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.

CHALLENGES FACED DURING THE INITIAL STAGES OF THE THE LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

​​​​​The initial stages of the LivePerson class action lawsuit will not be without their challenges. One of the primary challenges faced by the plaintiffs in the LivePerson lawsuit will be meeting the stringent requirements for class certification under the PSLRA. The heightened pleading standards introduced by the PSLRA made it more difficult for plaintiffs to survive motions to dismiss and proceed with their claims. Additionally, the defendants often employ various legal strategies to challenge class certification, including arguing against the numerosity or commonality of the class, or asserting that the representative parties are not adequate to protect the class's interests.

NOTABLE DEVELOPMENTS AND RULINGS IN THE CASE

​​​​Throughout the course of the LivePerson class action lawsuit, there will be several notable developments and rulings that shaped the trajectory of the litigation. For instance, the court may grand defendants' motion to dismiss and dismiss the LivePerson class action lawsuit, or issue a ruling on class certification, either granting or denying it based on the plaintiffs' ability to meet the requirements of Rule 23. These rulings have significant implications for the litigation, as class certification determines whether the case proceeds as a class action or as individual lawsuits.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS UNDER THE PSLRA

​​​​​The LivePerson class action lawsuit is just one example of the numerous class action lawsuits that have been filed under the PSLRA. By comparing the LivePerson lawsuit with other similar lawsuits, a clearer understanding of the impact of the PSLRA on class action litigation can be gained. It is important to note that each case is unique and may have specific circumstances that differentiate it from others. However, analyzing trends and commonalities among these cases can provide valuable insights into the efficacy of the PSLRA's provisions.

POTENTIAL OUTCOMES AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE LAWSUIT

​​​​​The potential outcomes and implications of the LivePerson class action lawsuit are significant for both the plaintiffs and the defendants. If the plaintiffs are successful in the LivePerson class action lawsuit, LivePerson may be required to provide monetary compensation to the class members and make changes to its business practices or other governance reforms. On the other hand, if the defendants prevail, it could set a precedent that may impact future class action lawsuits under the PSLRA. The implications of this case extend beyond the specific parties involved and have broader implications for the pharmaceutical industry and the legal landscape as a whole.

CONCLUSION

​​​​​In conclusion, the initial stages of the LivePerson class action lawsuit under the PSLRA involve a complex and multifaceted process, from the filing of the complaint to the certification of the class. Understanding the legal requirements, key parties, challenges, and potential outcomes of the LivePerson lawsuit is crucial to grasp the significance of this litigation. As the LivePerson lawsuit​​ progresses, it will undoubtedly continue to shape the landscape of class action lawsuits under the PSLRA and have far-reaching implications for both the pharmaceutical industry and the legal system as a whole.

CONTACT A LIVEPERSON STOCK LOSS LAWYER TODAY IF YOU SUFFERED LOSSES IN LIVEPERSON STOCK ABOUT A LIVEPERSON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

​If you suffered losses in LivePerson stock, contact LivePerson stock loss lawyer Timothy L. Miles today for a free case evaluation about a LivePerson class action lawsuit. Call today and see what a LivePerson stock loss lawyer could do for you if you suffered losses in LivePerson​ ​stock.

LivePerson stock loss lawyer Timothy L. Miles

Nashville attorney Timothy L. Miles is a nationally recognized shareholder rights attorney raised in Nashville, Tennessee. Mr. Miles has dedicated his career to representing shareholders, employees, and consumers in complex class-action litigation. Whether serving as lead, co-lead, or liaison counsel, Mr. Miles has helped recover hundreds of millions of dollars for defrauded investors, shaped precedent-setting decisions, and delivered real corporate governance reforms. Judges and peers have repeatedly recognized Mr. Miles’ relentless advocacy for the underdog, as well as his unbendable ethical standards. Mr. Miles was recently selected by Martindale-Hubbell® and ALM as a 2022 Top Ranked Lawyer, 2022 Top Rated Litigator. and a 2022 Elite Lawyer of the South. Mr. Miles also maintains the AV Preeminent Rating by Martindale-Hubbell®, their highest rating for both legal ability and ethics. Mr. Miles is a member of the prestigious Top 100 Civil Plaintiff Trial Lawyers: The National Trial Lawyers Association,​Class Action:  Class Action: Top National Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers Association (2023), a superb rated attorney by Avvo, a recipient of the Lifetime Achievement Award by Premier Lawyers of America (2019) and recognized as a Distinguished Lawyer, Recognizing Excellence in Securities Law, by Lawyers of Distinction (2019); a Top Rated Litigator by Martindale-Hubbell® and ALM  (2019-2022); America’s Most Honored Lawyers 2020 – Top 1% by America’s Most Honored (2020-2022).  Mr. Miles has published over sixty articles on various issues of the law, including class actions, whistleblower cases, products liability, civil procedure, derivative actions, corporate takeover litigation, corporate formation, mass torts, dangerous drugs, and more.  Please visit our website or call for free anytime.

CONTACT                                                      
The Law Offices of Timothy L. Miles
Tapestry at Brentwood Town Center
​300 Centerview Dr., #247
Brentwood, TN 37027
​​Phone: (855) 846-6529