Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 9, 2023

Efrat Investments LLC v. Hub Cyber Security Ltd.

Judge
Subramanian
Docket
1:23-cv-05764
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSecuritiesClass Action
In one sentence

In Efrat Investments LLC v. Hub Cyber Security Ltd., Judge Subramanian ordered new notice in Green and postponed Efrat’s lead-plaintiff hearing.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and potential lead plaintiffs in the related Efrat and Green securities class actions, particularly investors who may fall within Green’s broader proposed class and class period.

What happened

Efrat Investments LLC v. Hub Cyber Security Ltd. involved a related securities class action brought by Dustin Green against Hub Cyber Security Ltd. and others. Efrat’s plaintiff told the court that the later Green case did not need new notice because both cases arose from the same core facts.

The court found that Green’s proposed class covered more investors and a longer period than Efrat’s proposed class. It ordered Green’s plaintiff to publish a new notice within 20 days after filing the complaint and to report when and how the notice was published. The court also postponed the scheduled hearing on lead-plaintiff motions in Efrat and said it would set a new schedule in both cases.

Judge Arun Subramanian issued the order on August 9, 2023. The order addressed notice and scheduling; it did not decide which plaintiff should be appointed lead plaintiff or resolve the underlying securities claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Efrat Investments LLC v. Hub Cyber Security Ltd. · No. 1:23-cv-05764
Judge
Subramanian
Date
Aug. 9, 2023

Background

The order concerns two related cases against Hub Cyber Security Ltd. and others: Efrat Investments LLC v. Hub Cyber Security, No. 23-cv-05764, and Green v. Hub Cyber Security Ltd., No. 23-cv-06668. On August 7, 2023, the plaintiff in Efrat notified the court about the Green case and asserted that Green did not need separate publication of notice because the claims arose from the same core facts.

Notice Requirement

The court compared the proposed classes. The Green complaint covered a broader group and a longer class period than the Efrat complaint. The court reasoned that potential lead plaintiffs who were not included in the earlier notice might have disregarded it. Applying the notice requirement in Section 78u-4(a)(3)(A) of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, the court ordered the plaintiff in Green to publish a new notice no later than 20 days after the Green complaint was filed.

Ruling and Effect

The court ordered the Green plaintiff to inform the court in writing of the date and manner of publication by August 28, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. It postponed the October 3, 2023 hearing on lead-plaintiff motion practice in Efrat and stated that it would set a new schedule for lead-plaintiff motions in both cases after receiving the publication information. The order did not select a lead plaintiff or decide the merits of the securities claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.