Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 1 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
`Laurence M. Rosen, Esq. (SBN 219683)
`355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
`Telephone: (213) 785-2610
`Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
`Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
`
`Attorney for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`Case No.
`
`
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER
`DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`CARRIE ALEXANDER, derivatively on
`behalf of DOCUSIGN, INC.,
`
` Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`
`DANIEL D. SPRINGER, ENRIQUE
`SALEM, PETER SOLVIK, INHI CHO SUH,
`MARY AGNES WILDEROTTER, TERESA
`BRIGGS, BLAKE J. IRVING, JAMES
`BEER, CAIN A. HAYES, CYNTHIA
`GAYLOR, MICHAEL J. SHERIDAN, and
`LOREN ALHADEFF,
`
` Defendants,
`
`
`and
`
`DOCUSIGN, INC.,
`
`
`Nominal Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 2 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Carrie Alexander (“Plaintiff”), by and through Plaintiff’s undersigned attorneys,
`
`derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant DocuSign, Inc. (“DocuSign” or the “Company”),
`
`brings this Verified Shareholder Derivative Complaint against Daniel D. Springer (“Springer”),
`
`Enrique Salem (“Salem”), Peter Solvik (“Solvik”), Inhi Cho Suh (“Suh”), Mary Agnes
`
`Wilderotter (“Wilderotter”), Teresa Briggs (“Briggs”), Blake J. Irving (“Irving”), James Beer
`
`(“Beer”), Cain A. Hayes (“Hayes”), Cynthia Gaylor (“Gaylor”), Michael J. Sheridan
`
`(“Sheridan”), and Loren Alhadeff (“Alhadeff”) (collectively, the “Individual Defendants” and,
`
`together with DocuSign, “Defendants”) for and among other things, their breaches of fiduciary
`
`duties and violations of the federal securities laws.
`
`Plaintiff’s allegations are based upon personal knowledge as to herself and her own acts,
`
`and upon information and belief, including a review of publicly available information, including
`
`filings by DocuSign with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), press releases,
`
`news reports, analyst reports, investor conference transcripts, publicly available filings in
`
`lawsuits, and matters of public record. Plaintiff believes that substantial evidentiary support will
`
`exist for the allegations set forth herein after a reasonable opportunity for discovery.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is a shareholder derivative action brought against certain DocuSign officers
`
`and members of DocuSign’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) that seeks to remedy wrongdoing
`
`committed by the Individual Defendants between March 27, 2020 and June 13, 2022, inclusive
`
`(the “Relevant Period”).
`
`2.
`
`Nominal Defendant DocuSign is a software provider whose product facilitates the
`
`signing and preparation of agreements and other documents. The DocuSign Agreement Cloud, a
`
`software suite, allows users to generate, distribute, and sign agreements, and further offers
`
`technological support for, among other things, negotiating agreements and collecting payments.
`
`3.
`
`Throughout the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, DocuSign’s revenue
`
`grew substantially. In fact, for six straight quarters, the Company experienced increased growth
`
`in both revenue and billings.
`
`2
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 3 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`Throughout the Relevant Period, Defendants assured investors that DocuSign’s
`
`newfound growth was not solely the result of increased remote work and other pandemic
`
`restrictions, but was in fact indicative of a new paradigm under which DocuSign would maintain
`
`its rapid growth. For example, during a June 4, 2020 earnings call, Defendant Springer, the
`
`Company’s Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) at the time, stated that “even when the COVID-19
`
`situation is behind us, we don't anticipate customers returning to paper or manual-based
`
`processes.”
`
`5.
`
`The Individual Defendants also maintained that competition from other eSignature
`
`product providers, such as Adobe, did not pose a significant threat to DocuSign’s growth
`
`prospects. In addition, the Individual Defendants assured the investing public that sales of the
`
`Company’s contract lifestyle management (“CLM”) product would help to drive continued
`
`growth.
`
`6.
`
`In reality, the Individual Defendants were aware, through communications with
`
`customers, as well as through internal data collection, that most customers who began using
`
`DocuSign after the COVID-19 had began did not intend to renew their contracts with DocuSign
`
`once pandemic restrictions subsided, let alone expand their contracts with the addition of a CLM
`
`product. The Individual Defendants were also aware that competition from Adobe’s cheaper
`
`eSignature product was directly impacting DocuSign’s sales, and significantly decreased the
`
`likelihood that DocuSign would be able to sustain the levels of growth it experienced during the
`
`COVID-19 pandemic.
`
`7.
`
`Despite possessing the above information, the Individual Defendants provided
`
`misrepresentations and/or failed to disclose that: (1) much of DocuSign’s accelerated growth in
`
`2020 and 2021 was directly attributable to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions rather than a
`
`sustainable, increased shift in demand for the Company’s services; (2) demand for DocuSign’s
`
`services was, in fact, waning as COVID-19 pandemic restrictions were lifted; and (3) both
`
`competition from Adobe, as well as DocuSign’s difficulty in selling its CLM product, posed
`
`significant hurdles to the sustainability of DocuSign’s newfound, COVID-19-driven growth.
`
`3
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 4 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`As a result of the Individual Defendants’ misrepresentations, DocuSign’s share
`
`price was artificially inflated throughout the Relevant Period, reaching a high of $310.05 per share
`
`on September 3, 2021.
`
`9.
`
`The truth began to emerge in December 2021, when DocuSign disclosed a
`
`significant drop in billings. At that point, Defendants began representing that such a slow-down
`
`was expected and predictable. These representations stood in stark contrast to the representations
`
`made earlier in the Relevant Period, when the Individual Defendants stated that increased demand
`
`for DocuSign’s products was the result of a “new normal.”
`
`10.
`
`Following this disclosure, the price of DocuSign common stock declined $98.73
`
`per share, or more than 42%, from a close of $233.82 per share on December 2, 2021, to close at
`
`$135.09 per share on December 3, 2021.
`
`11.
`
`The Individual Defendants made two further disclosures that fully revealed that
`
`the Company’s earlier growth during the COVID-19 pandemic was fueled by the pandemic. On
`
`March 10, 2022, the Company announced its financial results for the fourth quarter of the 2022
`
`fiscal year, reporting the lowest quarterly billings growth the Company had ever experienced as
`
`a public Company. Then, on June 9, 2022, when announcing financial results for the first quarter
`
`of the 2023 fiscal year, the Company revealed that it had experienced even lower billings growth
`
`than the previous quarter, setting a new all time low as a public Company.
`
`12.
`
`As the reality of DocuSign’s prospects became clear over the next several days,
`
`analysts weighed in, with many downgrading DocuSign’s stock. As a result, the Company’s share
`
`price continued to drop, eventually closing at $59.12 per share on June 13, 2022.
`
`13.
`
`In light of the Individual Defendants’ misconduct, the Company as well as
`
`Defendants Springer, Sheridan, Gaylor, and Alhadeff were named as defendants in a federal
`
`securities fraud class action lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Northern
`
`District of California, captioned Weston v. DocuSign, Inc., et al., 3:22-cv-00824 (N.D.Cal.) (the
`
`“Securities Class Action.”) The Securities Class Action has further subjected DocuSign to the
`
`4
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 5 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`need to undertake internal investigations and the need to implement adequate internal controls, as
`
`well as exposed the Company to massive class-wide liability.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`14.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because
`
`Plaintiff’s claims raise a federal question under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. §
`
`78j(b)) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder (17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5), Section 20(a) of the
`
`Exchange Act (15 U.S. 78t(a)), and Section 21D of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. §78u-4(f)).
`
`Plaintiff’s claims also raise a federal question pertaining to the claims made in the Securities Class
`
`Action based on violations of the Exchange Act.
`
`15.
`
`This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims pursuant
`
`to 28 USC. §1367(a).
`
`16.
`
`This derivative action is not a collusive action to confer jurisdiction on a court of
`
`the United States that it would not otherwise have.
`
`17.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1401 because
`
`DocuSign’s principal executive offices are located in this district, a substantial portion of the
`
`transactions and wrongs complained of herein occurred in this District, and the Defendants have
`
`received substantial compensation in this district by engaging in numerous activities that had an
`
`effect in this District.
`
`PARTIES
`
`18.
`
`Plaintiff is a current shareholder of DocuSign and has continuously held DocuSign
`
`stock at all relevant times.
`
`19.
`
`Nominal Defendant DocuSign is a Delaware corporation and its principal
`
`executive offices are located at 221 Main St., Suite 1550, San Francisco, California 94105. The
`
`Company’s common stock trades on NASDAQ under the ticker symbol “DOCU.”
`
`20.
`
`Defendant Springer has served as a Company director since 2017 and previously
`
`served as the Company’s CEO and President from 2017 until his resignation from the roles of
`
`CEO and President in June 2022. According to the proxy statement filed on Schedule 14A with
`
`5
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 6 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`the SEC on April 18, 2023 (the “2023 Proxy Statement”), for fiscal 2022, Defendant Springer
`
`received $20,701,048 in total compensation from the Company. Defendant Springer is named as
`
`a defendant in the Securities Class Action.
`
`21.
`
`Defendant Salem has served as a Company director since August 2013. Defendant
`
`Salem currently serves as a member of the Audit Committee. According to the 2023 Proxy
`
`Statement, for the fiscal 2023, Defendant Salem received $277,449 in total compensation from
`
`the Company.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant Solvik has served as a Company director since March 2006. Defendant
`
`Solvik currently serves as a member of both the Compensation Committee and Nominating
`
`Committee. According to the 2023 Proxy Statement, in fiscal 2023, Defendant Solvik received
`
`$299,574 in total compensation from the Company.
`
`23.
`
`Defendant Suh served as the Company’s President of Product and Engineering
`
`from July 2022 to February 2024 and served as a Company director from August 2018 to July
`
`2022. According to the 2023 Proxy Statement, in fiscal 2023, Defendant Suh received
`
`$25,060,236 in total compensation from the Company.
`
`24.
`
`Defendant Wilderotter has served as a Company director since March 2018 and as
`
`Chair of the Board since January 2019. In addition, from June 2022 until October 2022, Defendant
`
`Wilderotter served as the Company’s interim President and CEO. According to the 2023 Proxy
`
`Statement, in fiscal 2023, Defendant Wilderotter received $4,815,994 in total compensation from
`
`the Company.
`
`25.
`
`Defendant Briggs has served as a Company director since May 2020. Defendant
`
`Briggs currently serves as Chair of the Audit Committee. According to the 2023 Proxy Statement,
`
`in fiscal 2023, Defendant Briggs received $289,949 in total compensation from the Company.
`
`26.
`
`Defendant Irving has served as a Company director since August 2018. Defendant
`
`Irving currently serves as a member of both the Compensation and Nominating Committees.
`
`According to the 2023 Proxy Statement, in fiscal 2023, Defendant Irving received $287,949 in
`
`total compensation from the Company.
`
`6
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 7 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`27.
`
`Defendant Beer has served as a Company director since August 2020. Defendant
`
`Beer currently serves as a member of the Audit Committee. According to the 2023 Proxy
`
`Statement, in fiscal 2023, Defendant Beer received $277,499 in total compensation from the
`
`Company.
`
`28.
`
`Defendant Hayes has served as a Company director since December 2020.
`
`Defendant Hayes currently serves as a member of the Compensation Committee. According to
`
`the 2023 Proxy Statement, in fiscal 2023, Defendant Hayes received $261,699 in total
`
`compensation from the Company.
`
`29.
`
`Defendant Gaylor served as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) from
`
`September 2020 until her resignation in June 2023. According to the 2023 Proxy Statement, in
`
`fiscal 2023, Defendant Gaylor received $21,654,155 in total compensation from the Company.
`
`Defendant Gaylor is named as a defendant in the Securities Class Action.
`
`30.
`
`Defendant Sheridan served as the Company’s CFO from August 2015 until
`
`September 2020. Defendant Sheridan then served as the Company’s President of International
`
`from September 2020 until November 2021. Defendant Sheridan is named as a defendant in the
`
`Securities Class Action.
`
`31.
`
`Defendant Alhadeff served as the Company’s Chief Revenue Officer from
`
`February 2019 until March 2022. According to the proxy statement filed on Schedule 14A on
`
`April 22, 2022 (the “2022 Proxy Statement”), in fiscal 2022, Defendant Alhadeff received
`
`$4,553,455 in total compensation from the Company. Defendant Alhadeff is named as a defendant
`
`in the Securities Class Action.
`
`32.
`
`Non-Party Allan Thygesen (“Thygesen”) has served as a Company director and as
`
`the Company’s CEO since October 2022. According to the 2023 Proxy Statement, in fiscal 2023,
`
`Defendant Thygesen received $85,035,380 in total compensation from the Company. Thygesen
`
`is named herein solely for the purposes of demand futility.
`
`33.
`
`Non-Party Anna Marrs (“Marrs”) was appointed as a Company director effective
`
`June 4, 2023. Marrs currently serves as a member of the Company’s Audit Committee. According
`
`7
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 8 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`to the guidelines articulated in the amended and restated Non-Employee Director Compensation
`
`Policy (the “Compensation Policy”) filed as Exhibit 10.7 to the Company’s June 8, 2023 Form
`
`10-Q, Marrs receives an annual retainer of at least $52,500 for her role as director. In addition,
`
`the Compensation Policy directs that newly elected directors be granted $500,000 worth of
`
`DocuSign common stock that is scheduled to vest over a three-year period. As she was elected as
`
`director in 2023, Marrs qualifies for that “Initial Grant.” Marrs is named herein solely for the
`
`purposes of demand futility.
`
`FIDUCIARY DUTIES OF THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
`
`34.
`
`By reason of their positions as officers, directors, and/or fiduciaries of DocuSign
`
`and because of their ability to control the business and corporate affairs of DocuSign, the
`
`Individual Defendants owed the Company and its shareholders the fiduciary obligations of trust,
`
`loyalty, good faith, and due care, and were and are required to use their utmost ability to control
`
`and manage the Company in a fair, just, honest, and equitable manner. The Individual Defendants
`
`were and are required to act in furtherance of the best interests of the Company and its
`
`shareholders.
`
`35.
`
`Each director and officer of the Company owes to the Company and its
`
`shareholders the fiduciary duty to exercise good faith and diligence in the administration of the
`
`affairs of the Company and in the use and preservation of its property and assets, as well as the
`
`highest obligations of fair dealing. In addition, as officers and/or directors of a publicly held
`
`company, the Individual Defendants had a duty to promptly disseminate accurate and truthful
`
`information regarding the Company’s operations, finances, financial condition, and present and
`
`future business prospects so that the market price of the Company’s stock would be based on
`
`truthful and accurate information.
`
`36.
`
`The Individual Defendants, because of their positions of control and authority as
`
`directors and/or officers of the Company, were able to and did, directly and/or indirectly, exercise
`
`control over the wrongful acts complained of herein, as well as the contents of the various public
`
`statements issued by the Company. Because of their advisory, executive, managerial and
`
`8
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 9 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`directorial positions with the Company, each of the Defendants had access to adverse non-public
`
`information about the financial condition, operations, sales and marketing practices, and improper
`
`representations of the Company.
`
`37.
`
`To discharge their duties, the officers and directors of the Company were required
`
`to exercise reasonable and prudent supervision over the management, policies, practices, and
`
`controls of the financial affairs of the Company. By virtue of such duties, the officers and directors
`
`of the Company were required to, among other things:
`
`(a)
`
`ensure that the Company complied with its legal obligations and
`
`requirements, including acting only within the scope of its legal authority and disseminating
`
`truthful and accurate statements to the SEC and the investing public;
`
`(b)
`
`conduct the affairs of the Company in an efficient, businesslike manner so
`
`as to make it possible to provide the highest quality performance of its business, to avoid wasting
`
`the Company’s assets, and to maximize the value of the Company’s stock;
`
`(c)
`
`properly and accurately guide investors and analysts as to the true financial
`
`condition of the Company at any given time, including making accurate statements about the
`
`Company’s business prospects, and ensuring that the Company maintained an adequate system
`
`of financial controls such that the Company’s financial reporting would be true and accurate at
`
`all times;
`
`(d)
`
`remain informed as to how the Company conducted its operations, and,
`
`upon receipt of notice or information of imprudent or unsound conditions or practices, make
`
`reasonable inquiries in connection therewith, take steps to correct such conditions or practices,
`
`and make such disclosures as necessary to comply with federal and state securities laws;
`
`(e)
`
`ensure that the Company was operated in a diligent, honest, and prudent
`
`manner in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, and rules and regulations;
`
`and
`
`(f)
`
`ensure that all decisions were the product of independent business
`
`judgment and not the result of outside influences or entrenchment motives.
`
`9
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 10 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`38.
`
`Each Individual Defendant, by virtue of his or her position as a director and/or
`
`officer, owed to the Company and to its shareholders the fiduciary duties of loyalty, good faith,
`
`and the exercise of due care and diligence in the management and administration of the affairs of
`
`the Company, as well as in the use and preservation of its property and assets. The conduct of the
`
`Individual Defendants complained of herein involves a knowing and culpable violation of their
`
`obligations as directors and officers of the Company, the absence of good faith on their part, and
`
`a reckless disregard for their duties to the Company and its shareholders that the Individual
`
`Defendants were aware or should have been aware posed a risk of serious injury to the Company.
`
`THE CODE OF CONDUCT
`
`39.
`
`DocuSign maintains a Code of Conduct (the “Code”). The version of the Code that
`
`was in effect during the Relevant Period stated that its purpose was to “set expectations and
`
`provide guidance applicable to every employee, officer and director of DocuSign.”
`
`40.
`
`In its “Overview,” the Code states that “[t]o build trust and confidence in our
`
`company, our people, our product, we must demonstrate integrity, reliability, honesty and strength
`
`of character at all times.”
`
`The Code contains a section titled “Financial Integrity,” which states as follows:
`
`41.
`
`Our corporate and business records, including all supporting entries to our books
`of account, must be completed honestly, accurately and understandably. To help
`ensure the integrity of our records and public disclosure, we require that:
`
` ●
`
` No entry be made in our books and records that is intentionally false or
`misleading;
`● Transactions be supported by appropriate documentation;
`● The terms of sales and other commercial transactions be reflected accurately in
`the documentation for those transactions and all such documentation be reflected
`accurately in our books and records;
`● Employees comply with our system of internal controls;
`
`* * *
`
`● No employee should knowingly make (or cause or encourage any other person
`to make) any false or misleading statement in any of our reports filed with the SEC
`or knowingly omit (or cause or encourage any other person to omit) any
`information necessary to make the disclosure in any of such reports accurate in all
`material respects.
`
`10
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 11 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`
`If you become aware that our public disclosures are not full, fair and accurate, or
`if you become aware of a transaction or development that you believe may require
`disclosure, you should report the matter immediately to your supervisor or the
`Compliance Officer.
`
`42.
`
`The Code also contains a section titled “Insider Trading,” which explains that
`
`employees, officers, and directors of DocuSign are:
`
`prohibited from using “inside” or material non-public information about the
`Company, or about companies with which we do business, in connection with
`buying or selling our or such other companies’ securities, including “tipping”
`others who might make an investment decision on the basis of this information. It
`is illegal, and it is a violation of this Code and other Company policies, to tip or to
`trade on inside information.
`
`
`SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS
`
`43.
`
`The Relevant Period begins on March 27, 2020. On that day, DocuSign filed its
`
`Annual Report on Form 10-K with the SEC for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2020 (the “2020
`
`10-K”). The 2020 10-K was signed by Defendants Springer, Sheridan, Wilderotter, Gaylor,
`
`Irving, Salem, Solvik, and Suh. Attached to the 2020 10-K were signed certifications by
`
`Defendants Springer and Sheridan pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”), attesting
`
`to the accuracy of the information in the 2020 10-K as to the financial condition of the Company,
`
`the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls, and the disclosure of any fraud committed
`
`by the Company, its officers, or its directors.
`
`44.
`
`Under a section titled “Risk Factors,” the 2020 10-K stated that “the recent
`
`coronavirus outbreak could harm our business and results of operations.” The section went to
`
`elaborate, stating that:
`
`[T]he coronavirus outbreak has created and may continue to create significant
`uncertainty in global financial markets, which may decrease technology spending,
`depress demand for our solutions, and harm our business and results of operations.
`
`* * *
`
`Unfavorable conditions in our industry or the global economy or reductions in
`information technology spending could limit our ability to grow our business and
`negatively affect our operating results.
`
`
`11
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 12 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Our operating results may vary based on the impact of changes in our industry or
`the global economy on us and our existing and prospective customers. The revenue
`growth and potential profitability of our business depend on demand for our
`products and solutions. Current or future economic uncertainties or downturns
`could adversely affect our business and operating results. Negative conditions in
`the general economy both in the United States and abroad, including conditions
`resulting from changes in gross domestic product growth, financial and credit
`market fluctuations, political turmoil, natural catastrophes, warfare and terrorist
`attacks on the United States, Europe, the Asia Pacific region or elsewhere, could
`cause a decrease in business investments, including spending on information
`technology, and negatively affect the growth of our business. In addition, the
`recent outbreak of the coronavirus has created significant additional uncertainty in
`the global economy. If the coronavirus outbreak worsens, especially in regions
`in which we have material operations or sales, such as the United States,
`Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Ireland Israel, Australia,
`Singapore, Japan or Brazil, our business activities originating from affected
`areas, including sales-related activities, could be adversely affected. Disruptive
`activities could include business closures in impacted areas and restrictions in
`our employees’ and other service providers’ ability to travel.
`
`* * *
`
`Our stock price may be volatile, and the value of our common stock may decline.
`The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile and may fluctuate
`or decline substantially as a result of a variety of factors, some of which are
`beyond our control or are related in complex ways, including:
`
`[. . .] terrorist attacks, natural disasters, public health crises (such as the recent
`coronavirus outbreak) or other such events impacting countries where we have
`operations[.]”1
`
`45.
`
`On June 4, 2020, DocuSign issued a press release (the “June 2020 Press Release”)
`
`announcing its financial results for the first quarter of fiscal 2021. The June 2020 Press Release
`
`reported quarterly revenue of $297 million—a 39% increase compared to the prior year. The June
`
`2020 Press Release also contained the following statement from Defendant Springer, explaining
`
`that the Company’s strong results: “reflect our ability to help organizations accelerate their digital
`
`transformation as they adapt to the changing business environment, magnified by COVID-
`
`19…our Agreement Cloud offerings are not only helping customers carry on with business in this
`
`time of crisis, but will continue to deliver value as the world emerges from it.”
`
`
`1 All emphasis added unless otherwise noted.
`
`12
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 13 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`46.
`
`Later that same day, during an earnings call to discuss the Company’s financial
`
`results for the first quarter of fiscal 2021, Defendant Springer explained that the permanent shift
`
`to remote work was a driver of DocuSign’s growth:
`
`The COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally shifted the global macroeconomic
`environment and impacted countless lives around the world.
`
`* * *
`
`Much of the strong Q1 performance was driven by increased demand for
`eSignature from organizations that suddenly needed a way to sign and manage
`agreements from wherever they were. Typically, eSignature is the first step that
`many customers take on their broader digital transformation journey with us. So
`from a financial point of view, we believe this surge in eSignature adoption bodes
`well for future Agreement Cloud expansion.
`
`* * *
`
`Let me speak briefly about where we see things going from here. While no one is
`100% sure what the world will look like, it's clear that the ways of doing business
`are changing. Remote work is here to stay. Core business processes will only
`become more digital and agreements will need to be completed from anywhere, at
`any time on almost any device. As a result, for organizations that hadn't already
`embraced DocuSign for eSignature, that were only using us for a few select use
`cases, the pandemic has been a catalyst for the greater digital transformation of
`their end-to-end agreement processes. We always believed this transformation will
`happen and that a unifying platform for agreements will be needed. COVID-19 is
`just happening faster.
`
`That said, even when the COVID-19 situation is behind us, we don't anticipate
`customers returning to paper or manual-based processes. Once they take their
`first digital transformation steps with us and they realize the time, cost and
`customer experience benefits, they rarely go back. So, in short, we expect the
`adoption of our core eSignature offering by new customers and the expansion
`of use cases by existing ones to continue. This also acts as the on-ramp for the
`adoption of other Agreement Cloud products, sometimes at the same time,
`sometimes as follow on's.
`
`* * *
`
`Yeah, I don't think we've seen anything particularly from COVID that would
`accelerate that move where we work with one or two divisions and now we get
`more of an enterprise solution other than the same macro piece we talked about,
`which is, as companies are increasingly seeing the need to drive the digital
`transformation, that's accelerating. It probably, at the same rate, would
`accelerate those expansions from divisional projects to broader enterprisewide
`solutions. But I think, at this point, we'd say, that phenomenon is occurring. It's
`
`13
`VERIFIED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case 3:24-cv-02139-TSH Document 1 Filed 04/09/24 Page 14 of 49
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`always been a big growth opportunity for us and I think it's the same big growth
`opportunity for us going forward, but I don't think COVID acceleration of
`digital transformation is going to change that phenomenon or that rate at which
`we see that going, other than just making everything go a little bit faster.”
`
`47.
`
`Later during that same June 4, 2020 earnings call, an analyst questioned Defe