The investors didn’t adequately allege the robotics company’s statements were false or misleading, and the complaint didn’t raise a strong inference that iRobot acted with the required state of mind, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts said.
Investors challenged a range of iRobot statements on consumer demand, market share, and competition. Without alleging that the company’s statements about past demand were false or ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.