Company Name: DiDi Global, Inc.
Securities: NYSE: DIDI
Class Period: June 30, 2021 to July 2, 2021
IPO Date: June 30, 2021
Motion Deadline: September 7, 2021
Court: Southern District of New York and Central District of California
DiDi Global, Inc. (NYSE: DIDI) calls itself the “world’s largest mobility technology platform” and provides services including ride hailing, taxi hailing, chauffeur, hitch and other forms of shared mobility. DiDi, which has been called the “Uber of China,” operates in approximately 4,000 cities, counties, and towns across 17 countries.
On June 30, 2021, DiDi held its initial public offering, selling 316.8 million American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) at $14.00 per ADR and raising over $4 billion.
Before the market opened on July 2, 2021, the Cybersecurity Administration of China (CAC) said on its website that it had launched an investigation into DiDi and said DiDi wasn’t allowed to register new users during the investigation. The CAC wanted to prevent data security-related risks from DiDi’s gathering of vast amounts of real-time mobility data. As a result of this news, DiDi’s ADS price fell over 5% to close at $15.53 per ADS.
Then on July 4, 2020, the CAC ordered DiDi’s app removed from China-based app stores because the app seriously violated the country’s laws and regulations through the improper collection and usage of user information. On July 5, 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that the CAC suggested to DiDi weeks before DiDi’s IPO that DiDi delay the offering and “conduct a thorough self-examination of its network security.”
As a result of this news, on July 6, 2021, the next trading day after July 2, 2021, the price of DiDi ADRs fell $3.04 per share, or more than 19.5%, to close at $12.49 per ADR.
The DiDi securities class action litigation alleges, among other things, that the Defendants made false and misleading public statements and failed to disclose that: (1) DiDi’s apps did not comply with applicable laws and regulations governing privacy protection and the collection of personal information; (2) as a result, DiDi was reasonably likely to incur scrutiny from the CAC; (3) the CAC had already warned DiDi to delay its IPO to conduct a self-examination of its network security; (4) as a result of the foregoing, DiDi’s apps were reasonably likely to be taken down from app stores in China, which would have an adverse effect on its financial results and operations; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased DiDi securities pursuant or traceable to DiDi’s IPO or during the Class Period to ask the court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the DiDi securities class action litigation. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the class action lawsuit, and can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class action lawsuit. A court will generally appoint as lead plaintiff the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the proposed class of investors and that is also typical and adequate of the proposed class. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery obtained in the litigation is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff in the DiDi securities class action litigation or have questions concerning your rights regarding the DiDi securities class action litigation, please contact Joshua Ruthizer at (212) 451-9668, (877) 370-7703, or email@example.com.
The deadline for DiDi investors to file a motion for appointment as lead plaintiff is September 7, 2021.
For further information about this case, contact:
Robert C. Finkel
Joshua W. Ruthizer