In This Article:
New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - September 26, 2019) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, reminds investors in DXC Technology Company (NYSE: DXC) ("DXC" or the "Company") of the November 15, 2019 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.
If you invested in DXC common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's April 2017 registration statement and prospectus (collectively, the "Registration Statement") issued in connection with the April 2017 transaction by which Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company's Enterprise Services segment was spun off and merged with Computer Sciences Corporation, Inc. to form DXC (the "Merger") and would like to discuss your legal rights, click here: www.faruqilaw.com/DXC . There is no cost or obligation to you.
You can also contact us by calling Richard Gonnello toll free at 877-247-4292 or at 212-983-9330 or by sending an e-mail to rgonnello@faruqilaw.com.
CONTACT:
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
685 Third Avenue, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Attn: Richard Gonnello, Esq.
rgonnello@faruqilaw.com
Telephone: (877) 247-4292 or (212) 983-9330
The lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all those who purchased DXC common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's April 2017 IPO. The case, Costanzo v. DXC Technology Company et al., No. 19-cv-05794 was filed on September 16, 2019, and has been assigned to Beth Labson Freeman.
The lawsuit focuses on whether the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose to investors: (1) that the planned "workforce optimization" plan involved implementing arbitrary quotas; (2) that the plan would cut thousands of jobs at the Company; (3) that jobs that were particularly at risk of being cut were held by longer-tenured, knowledgeable, and highly compensated senior personnel; (4) that these job terminations were selectively timed to artificially inflate reported earnings and other financial metrics; (5) that, at the time of the Merger, defendant Lawrie had forecasted plans for a $2.7 billion workforce reduction in the first year; (6) that, as a result of these workforce terminations, the Company was unlikely to deliver on client contracts; (7) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's clients would be dissatisfied and the relationships would be impaired; and (8) that, 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.