In addition, the defendants' legal team alleges that the Zocdoc financials referenced in Massoumi's complaint violate the NDA he signed in order to receive the private company's information as a stockholder.īeyond these arguments, the filing also notes that Massoumi's complaint does not make a case of fraud, as the company's bylaws "do not require advance notice of agenda items for regularly scheduled board meetings like the one in which was terminated]."Īdditionally, the defendants argue that Massoumi's complaint does not provide any specifics regarding the alleged misdirection, "though it would have obviously contradicted the bylaws if they had," and that Massoumi in fact did not own enough stock options in late 2015 to block the vote as he had claimed, "and thus cannot establish that Defendants’ purported fraud caused his alleged losses." Oliver Kharraz and Netta Samroengraja ) argue that the case should be dismissed and re-filed in Delaware, rather than in New York where the statute of limitations for fraud is longer.Īs it stands now, the suit violates Zocdoc's bylaws that require internal affairs claims to be litigated in Delaware, the filing reads, and tries to avoid this requirement by targeting individual stakeholders rather than Zocdoc itself. In the new filing, attorneys of the defendants (Nikhil Ganju, Dr. Zocdoc calls for dismissal and re-filing in light of company bylaws, NDA breach Massoumi's original complaint painted the picture of a collaborative effort to mislead the former CEO about an upcoming board vote so that he could not exercise stock options and protect himself from an unexpected expulsion. About a month after ousted Zocdoc CEO Cyrus Massoumi filed a lawsuit accusing the company's executives of conspiracy, the online appointment booking service has fired back with a legal motion to dismiss Massoumi's suit and a blog post that refutes his critiques of their financial performance and strategy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |