Skip to Content

Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd.

Securities Class Action

  • Date:
  • 10/24/2022
  • Company Name:
  • Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd.
  • Stock Symbol:
  • DDL
  • Class Period:
  • FROM 6/29/2021 TO 6/29/2021
  • Status:
  • Filed
  • Filing Date:
  • 8/25/2022
  • Court:
  • U.S. District Court: Southern District of New York

Case Finder

Locate any case using the tools below.

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized stockholder rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd. (“Dingdong” or the “Company”) (NYSE: DDL) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Dingdong securities pursuant to the Company’s June 29, 2021 IPO, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Investors have until October 24, 2022 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.

Dingdong purports to be a leading and the fastest growing on-demand e-commerce company in China. Dingdong conducted its IPO in New York, and its ADS are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the ticker symbol “DDL.”

In June 2021, as part of Dingdong’s IPO, Defendants issued approximately 4.07 million ADS to the investing public at $23.50 per ADS, all pursuant to the Registration Statement.

According to the Registration Statement, Dingdong’s mission is to “make fresh groceries as available as running water to ever household.” To achieve this end, Dingdong has purportedly “embraced a user-centric philosophy” that is committed to “directly providing users and householders… fresh produce, mean and seafood and other daily necessities through a convenient and excellent shopping experience supported by an extensive self-operated frontline fulfillment grid [emphasis added].” Critically, Dingdong differentiates itself from its competitors by claiming to “procure… products primarily form direct upstream sources such as farms and cooperatives,” “apply stringent quality control across [its] entire supply chain to ensure product quality to [its] users,” and rely on its “frontline fulfillment grid and robust, digitalized fulfillment capabilities… [to] deliver… orders within 30 minutes [emphasis added].”

Unbeknownst to prospective investors, however, the Registration Statement misrepresented Dingdong’s commitment to ensuring the safety and quality of the food it distributes to the market. In fact, Dingdong was actively flouting its food safety responsibilities, selling, for example, dead fish to customers while marketing it as live fish and recycling vegetables that were past their sell-by date. In other words, Dingdong was no better at providing or assuring access to “fresh” groceries than the supermarkets, traditional Chinese wet markets, or traditional e-commerce platforms it repeatedly claimed to be displacing. The foregoing conduct subjected Dingdong to increased risk of regulatory and/or governmental scrutiny and enforcement, all of which, once revealed, were likely to (and did) negatively impact Dingdong’s business, operations, and reputation. By omitting these facts, ADS purchasers were unable to adequately assess the value of the shares offered in connection with the IPO, and thus purchased their ADS without material information and to their detriment.

According to the Complaint, the Company’s public statements throughout the IPO period were false and materially misleading. When the market learned the truth about Dingdong, investors suffered damages.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Dingdong shares and suffered a loss, are a long-term stockholder, have information, would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Brandon Walker or Melissa Fortunato by email at investigations@bespc.com, telephone at (212) 355-4648, or by filling out the form below.  There is no cost or obligation to you.
The individual or institution below (“Plaintiff”) has reviewed and agrees to the Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. (“BESPC”) retainer agreement and authorizes BESPC to prosecute an action on Plaintiff’s behalf under the federal securities laws or applicable state laws to recover damages on behalf of investors in Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd.. BESPC will prosecute the action on a full contingency basis and will forward all costs and expenses.
 

Case Finder

Locate any case using the tools below.

You may share a link to this page on any of the sites listed below or send link via email: