UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTMCT OF OHIO
`JAN DURBIN, Individually and on Behalf of
`All Others Similarly Situated,
`Plaintiff,
`V.
`MEDPACE HOLDINGS INC., AUGUST
`JAMES TROENDLE, JESSE J. GEIGER, and
`KEVIN M. BRADY,
`Defendants.
`Case No.
`COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS
`OF THE FEDERAL SECUMTIES
`LAWS
`CLASS ACTION
`Demand for Jury Trial
`Plaintiff Jan Durbin ("Plaintiff), individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly
`situated, by her undersigned attorneys, alleges in this Complaint for violations of the federal
`securities laws (the "Complaint") the following based upon knowledge with respect to her own
`acts, and upon facts obtained through an investigation conducted by her counsel, which included,
`inter alia: (a) review and analysis of relevant filings made by Medpace Holdings Inc. ("Medpace"
`or the "Company") with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"); (b)
`review and analysis ofMedpace's public documents, conference calls, press releases, and stock
`chart; (c) review and analysis of securities analysts' reports and advisories concerning the
`Company; and (d) information readily obtainable on the internet.
`Plaintiff believes that further substantial evidentiary support will exist for the allegations
`set forth herein after a reasonable opportunity for discovery. Most of the facts supporting the
`allegations contained herein are known only to the defendants or are exclusively within their
`control.
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 1 of 27 PAGEID #: 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`1. This is a federal securities class action on behalf of all investors who purchased or
`otherwise acquired Medpace common stock between April 22, 2025 and February 9, 2026,
`inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of
`the federal securities laws (the "Class").
`2. Defendants provided investors with material information concerning Medpace's
`expected book-to-bill ratio for the fourth quarter 2025. Defendants' statements, among other
`things, portrayed an overly optimistic book-to-bill ratio of 1. 15 throughout the Company's fiscal
`year. Particularly, Medpace continuously made statements during earnings calls focused on the
`Company's anticipated book-to-bill ratio of 1. 15 during the second half of fiscal year 2025.
`3. Defendants provided these positive statements to investors while, at the same time,
`disseminating false and materially misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts
`concerning the tme state ofMedpace's backlog cancellation rate. In fact, Defendants continuously
`touted "well behaved" cancellation rates. Furthennore, Medpace made clear that cancellations
`were not caused by weak business or a weak funding environment, providing investors with overly
`positive growth expectations that could not maintain the projected 1. 15 book-to-bill ratio. Such
`statements absent these material facts caused Plaintiff and other shareholders to purchase
`Medpace's common stock at artificially inflated prices.
`4. Investors began to question the veracity of Defendants' public statements on
`Febmary 9, 2026, when Medpace issued a press release announcing the Company's fourth quarter
`2025 book-to-bill ratio of 1.04, well below the guidance of 1. 15.
`5. Investors and analysts reacted immediately to Medpace's revelation. The price of
`Medpace's common stock declined dramatically. From a closing market price of $530. 35 per share
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 2 of 27 PAGEID #: 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`on February 9, 2026, Medpace's common stock price fell to $446. 05 per share on February 10,
`2026, a decline of more than 15. 9%.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`6. Plaintiff brings this action, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated
`investors, to recover losses sustained in connection with Defendants' fraud.
`7. The claims asserted herein arise under and pursuant to §§10(b) and 20(a) of the
`Exchange Act (15 U. S. C. §§ 78j(b) and 78t(a)) and Rule lOb-5 promulgated thereunder by the
`SEC(17C. F. R. §240. 10b-5).
`8. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28
`U. S. C. §§1331 and 1337, and Section 27 of the Exchange Act, 15 U. S. C. §78aa.
`9. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to §27 of the Exchange Act and 28 U. S. C.
`§1391(b), as a significant portion of Defendant Medpace's business, actions, and the subsequent
`damages to Plaintiff and the Class, took place within this District.
`10. In connection with the acts, conduct and other wrongs alleged in this Complaint,
`Defendants, directly or indirectly, used the means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce,
`including but not limited to, the United States mail, interstate telephone communications and the
`facilities of the national securities exchange.
`THE PARTIES
`11. Plaintiff purchased Medpace conmion stock at artificially inflated prices during the
`Class Period and was damaged upon the revelation of the Defendants' fraud. Plaintiffs
`certification evidencing her transaction(s) in Medpace is attached hereto.
`12. Medpace Holdings Inc. is an international coqioration with its principal executive
`offices located at 5375 Medpace Way, Cincinnati, OH 45227. During the Class Penod, the
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 3 of 27 PAGEID #: 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Company's common stock traded on the NASDAQ Stock Market (the "NASDAQ") under the
`symbol "MEDP."
`13. Defendant August James Troendle ("Troendle") was, at all relevant times, the
`Chairman and Chief Executive Officer ofMedpace.
`14. Defendant Jesse J. Geiger ("Geiger") was, at all relevant times, the President of
`Medpace.
`15. Defendant Kevin M. Brady ("Brady") was, at all relevant times, the Chief Financial
`Officer and Treasurer ofMedpace.
`16. Defendants Troendle, Geiger, and Brady are sometimes referred to herein as the
`"Individual Defendants. " Medpace together with the Individual Defendants are referred to herein
`as the "Defendants."
`17. The Individual Defendants, because of their positions with the Company, possessed
`the power and authority to control the contents ofMedpace's reports to the SEC, press releases,
`and presentations to securities analysts, money and portfolio managers, and institutional investors,
`i. e., the market. Each Individual Defendant was provided with copies of the Company's reports
`and press releases alleged herein to be misleading prior to, or shortly after, their issuance and had
`the ability and opportunity to prevent their issuance or cause them to be corrected. Because of their
`positions and access to material non-public information available to them, each of these Individual
`Defendants knew that the adverse facts specified herein had not been disclosed to, and were being
`concealed from, the public, and that the positive representations which were being made were then
`materially false and/or misleading. The Individual Defendants are liable for the false statements
`pleaded herein, as those statements were each "group-published" information, the result of the
`collective actions of the Individual Defendants.
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 4 of 27 PAGEID #: 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18. Medpace is liable for the acts of the Individual Defendants, and its employees under
`the doctrine ofrespondeat superior and common law principles of agency as all the wrongful acts
`complained of herein were carried out within the scope of their employment with authorization.
`19. The scienter of the Individual Defendants, and other employees and agents of the
`Company are similarly imputed to Medpace under respondeat superior and agency principles.
`SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS
`Company Background
`20. Medpace is a clinical contract research organization (CRO) focused on providing
`scientifically-driven outsourced clinical development services to the biotechnology,
`pharmaceutical, and medical device industries. The Company's operating model centers on
`providing full-service Phase I-IV clinical development services and therapeutic expertise.
`The Defendants Materially Misled Investors Concerning
`Medpace's Projected Book-to-Bill Ratio for Fourth Quarter 2025
`April 22. 2025
`21. On April 22, 2025, Medpace hosted an earnings call wherein management detailed
`the results for first quarter 2025, as well as guidance for the year. In relevant part. President Geiger
`stated:
`Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Revenue for the first quarter of 2025 was
`$558. 6 million, which represents a year-over-year increase of 9. 3%. Net new
`business awards entering backlog in the first quarter decreased 1 8. 8% from the prior
`year to $500 million, resulting in a 0. 9 net book-to-bill. And ending backlog as of
`March 31, 2025, was approximately $2. 8 billion, a decrease of 2. 1% from the prior
`year. We project that approximately $1.61 billion of backlog will convert to
`revenue in the next 12 months, and backlog conversion in the first quarter was
`19.2% of beginning backlog.
`22. As part of the earnings call, Defendants answered questions from analysts, in
`pertinent part:
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 5 of 27 PAGEID #: 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`<Q: Maxwell Andrew Smock - William Blair - Analyst> August, you mentioned
`I think you can get back to 1. 15 book-to-bill in the back half of the year, if you get
`that improved climate. I guess my question would be, what do you think bookings
`look like if you don't get that improved at climate? And then in that scenario where
`we assume even a stable environment from here, how much downside is there to
`the top line this year? And then what would that imply for top line growth in 2026?
`<A: August James Troendle> How much risk is it a top line this year? You mean
`bookings? Or are you talking about revenue - second half?
`<Q: Maxwell Andrew Smock - William Blair - Analyst> Yes, more impact on
`revenue in the second half. I guess 3 parts, right? If the environment is stable from
`here? What does book-to-bill look like in the back half of the year? How much
`downside is there to how you're thinking about revenue in the back half and the end
`of your guidance for this year? And then what does that all imply for top line growth
`in 20267
`<A: August James Troendle>
`Yes. Well, that's kind of a difficult hypothetical, what kind of downside is there?
`That depends on how bad the environment gets if cancellations continue kind of
`the way they have of recent past and particularly this past quarter and some of the
`quarters last year. We're going to be in the same kind of place we've been,
`somewhere around 1, 1 guess. I think that's kind of the downside. But we still have
`opportunities to, again paths toward getting to 1. 15.
`Revenue in the second half is pretty much locked in, that's kind of a different issue
`because that's a different cancellation. It would be a more later-stage cancellation
`to knock our revenue off. Now that's possible. And of course, we continue to have
`clients with funding difficulties that we have to stop work on and - or cancel the
`project because of work. So there's still some risk to second half revenue, but most
`of that is pretty locked in. And I really don't have a model for '26. So I can't go there
`yet. And the envirom-nent is just too early to really talk about 2026 revenue impact
`of poor bookings through this year.
`<Q: Maxwell Andrew Smock - William Blair - Analyst> Yes. Understood. And
`then maybe frame me as the downside scenario wasn't very - I was thinking more,
`but if things stay the same, stay the way they are today, and you don't get that
`improved climate. And just to confinn, if that is the case and we're talking book-
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 6 of 27 PAGEID #: 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`to-bill kind of around 1. 0 in the back half of the year versus if you do get that
`improvement, do you still think it can get to 1. 15?
`<A: August James Troendle> Correct.
`July 22, 2025
`23. On July 22, 2025, Medpace hosted an earnings call wherein management detailed
`the results for second quarter 2025. CEO Troendle stated, in pertinent part:
`Good day. RFP flow in Q2 continued to be strong, and we saw an increase in rate
`of decisions. Total pending RFP dollars were down on the quarter and our award
`notifications were strong. Cancellations were down across the pipeline and awards
`recognized in the backlog were the highest in the past 5 quarters with a book-to-bill
`of 1. 03x in the second quarter of 2025.
`We continue to see a strong potential for book-to-bills returning to above 1. 15x in
`Q3. Although funding challenges remain acute for many of our clients, the large
`majority of those clients with ongoing studies were able to obtain sufficient funding
`to keep the trials mnning. The funding environment has been stable to improve.
`Due to several factors, including better funding than anticipated, fewer
`cancellations, accelerated client decisions, rapid project start-up, shifting mix away
`from oncology and toward faster burning therapeutic areas and significantly higher
`investigator costs, we now anticipate accelerating revenue in the second half of the
`year. As a result, our revenue guidance has been raised by $280 million at the
`midpoint.
`24. Also as part of the earnings call, Medpace's management answered questions from
`analysts, in relevant part:
`<Q: Ann Kathleen Hynes - Mizuho - Analyst> Great. Could you just let us know
`what your booking expectations are for the second half? And the reason being is
`that your bum rate stepped up in 2Q and obviously, your guidance implies a step-
`up in 3Q and 4Q. And I'm just trying to figure out what that means for 2026 revenue
`growth. I kiiow you don't probably want to give guidance for 2026. But do you
`expect an acceleration in bookings for the second half to support growth in 20267
`<A: August James Troendle> Yes. As I said in my prepared comments, we do
`believe that there's a reasonable chance of getting book-to-bills back over 1. 15x,
`which implies a considerable increase in bookings as our revenue is also growing.
`So yes, we do expect bookings to increase. Now again, that's always dependent
`upon cancellations, which were very well behaved in this quarter. But last quarter,
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 7 of 27 PAGEID #: 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`they were terribly high. So if things continue in the trend we saw in this quarter,
`then yes, we expect bookings to remain strong through the remainder of the year.
`<Q: Ann Kathleen Hynes>And can you provide any more information on
`cancellations?
`Like what was the rate this quarter versus what had been trending the past couple
`of quarters?
`<A: August James Troendle> Yes. We don't disclose the actual rate, but it was
`down across the entire portfolio. So both sort of the non-backlog awards before
`they get the backlog was very low. And our backlog cancellations that have been
`at or above the upper range of what we'd consider normal. They're actually toward
`the lower end of expectations or usual history in this past quarter in Q2. So they
`were actually very well behaved. And that, of course, made us exceed what we
`thought we were going to do in terms of both bookings and overall perfonnance in
`tenns of revenue and EBITDA.
`October 23, 2025
`25. On October 23, 2025, Medpace hosted an earnings call wherein management
`detailed the results for third quarter 2025. CEO Troendle stated, in pertinent part:
`Good day, everyone. Cancellations were well behaved in Q3, permitting record net
`bookings and a net book-to-bill of 1. 20. RFP quality remains solid with decisions
`progressing on a usual tempo. Initial award notifications were strong, and our total
`dollar value of awarded work not yet recognized in the backlog was up
`approximately 30% in Q3 on a year-over-year basis. We are making good progress
`toward refilling our pipeline of opportunities.
`We will provide 2026 guidance when we report full year 2025 results in February.
`However, I will provide a brief preliminary view in an attempt to avoid significant
`divergence between our view and analyst models. We anticipate 2026 revenue to
`grow in a low double-digit range off our updated 2025 full year guidance. We
`expect EBITDA to grow at a high single-digit pace or greater. We believe pass-
`through costs will remain high compared to historical levels and represent between
`41% and 42% of revenue.
`26. Also during the earnings call, President Geiger stated, in relevant part:
`Good morning, everyone. Revenue in the third quarter of 2025 was $659. 9 million,
`which represents a year-over-year increase of 23. 7%. Net new business awards
`entering backlog in the third quarter increased 47. 9% fi-om the prior year to $789.6
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 8 of 27 PAGEID #: 8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`million, resulting in a 1. 20 net book-to-bill. Ending backlog as of September 30,
`2025, was approximately $3 billion, an increase of 2. 5% from the prior year. We
`project that approximately $1. 84 billion of backlog will convert to revenue in the
`next 12 months, and our backlog conversion in the third quarter was 23% of
`begiiming backlog.
`27. During the earnings call, CFO Brady provided updated guidance for fiscal year
`2025, in pertinent part:
`Moving now to our updated guidance for 2025. Full year 2025 total revenue is now
`expected in the range of $2.48 billion to $2. 53 billion, representing growth of 17. 6%
`to 20% over 2024 total revenue of $2. 11 billion. Our 2025 EBITDA is now
`expected in the range of $545 million to $555 million, representing growth of
`13. 5% to 15. 6% compared to EBITDA of $480. 2 million in 2024. We forecast 2025
`net income in the range of $431 million to $439 million.
`28. As part of the earnings call, Medpace management responded to questions from
`analysts, in relevant part:
`<Q: Charles Rhyee - TD - Analyst> Obviously, congrats on the quarter here. When
`we think about sort of the kind of ranges that you've given for next year, how should
`we think about the pass-throughs in relation to maybe the increase in metabolic
`work? Obviously, we saw another increase here as a percent of total revenue to
`30% in the third quarter from 25% in the first half. But you're still calling out for
`pass-throughs to remain stable in '26 at that sort of 41% to 42% range. When we
`think out of your current bookings, are you seeing less metabolic trials compared
`to your current bum? Or should we expect to see soi-ne kind of leveling off in terms
`of the higher metabolic mix?
`<A: August James Troendle> Yes. I think over the course of '26, it will level off
`some and might even come down a little bit. But - and it isn't just the shift to
`metabolic studies. That is the largest driver, which we've talked about, of course.
`But timing of projects and having a lot oflate-stage projects in what we're burning
`as we're going to start ramping up new studies, new studies are - even if they have
`the same mix ofpass-through costs, there's greater direct costs incurred earlier in a
`trial.
`I mean pass-through costs are late in the trial. A trial starts and - some trials, you
`can get halfway through the trial in temis of direct fees, and we've earned half of
`our - half of the revenue from our activities, and we haven't paid sites anything
`hardly. It's start-up, if it's a very short trial and start-up is a big part of it. So the
`pass-through parts of a trial are backloaded. So if you have a back-loaded portfolio
`stuff you're burning, you're going to have more pass-throughs as a - pass-through
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 9 of 27 PAGEID #: 9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`expenses at that time. So there's a number of things driving it. But yes, we do expect
`pass-thi-ough to maybe peak in Q4 or so and come down over '26.
`<Q: David Howard Windley - Jefferies - Analyst> So that's good timing. I'll come
`in right behind that. So August, in '23, '24, a lot of your peers saw their activity
`levels, which would be more akin to your kind of initial award timing moderate
`decline, begin to feel the impact of lower funding. And then for you, that
`materialized for Medpace, I should say, that materialized in the weaker book-to-
`bills more in the mid '24 timeframe as you saw some of that pre-backlog cancel out
`and not move forward, et cetera. So kind of the same timing dynamic sets up for
`what was a pretty weak funding environment in the first half of'25. So your last
`answer may have been pointing at me specifically, I'll take that. Why is this time
`difference - why is this time different?
`<A: August James Troendle> I don't know. The difference - a big difference is this
`has been driven by cancellations, not weak business. There are many challenged
`clients, and that does affect the business environment. And there's been a really a
`highly unusual series of cancellations that we went through. But the business
`environment underlying it has always been pretty okay. And maybe you're saying,
`well, not real strong compared to what it had been a few years ago, but it's pretty
`good.
`And despite all these huge cancellations out of this pre-backlog awarded study
`bucket, despite all of those, we still grew that bucket by 30% over the last year. It
`would have grown much faster, and we'd have a much bigger backlog at this point
`if we hadn't had those cancellations. But the difference is this has been driven by
`cancellations, not really weak funding environment causing lack of opportunities.
`<Q: Maxwell Andrew Smock - William Blair - Analyst> August, maybe one on
`the just expectations for book-to-bill here moving forward. You talked about initial
`awards being up 30% year-over-year. But based on kind of the midpoint of the
`guide here, I think you need to do 55% growth in bookings in 4Q to put up a 1.2
`book-to-bill in the quarter. Can you help us bridge that gap? And maybe just
`elaborate on your booking expectations for 4Q and what you've embedded in your
`guide for bookings in 2026?
`<A: August James Troendle>Yes. We're not giving a guide to '26, and I don't know
`where the bookings are going to come out. So I'm not going to get into trying to set
`them. We did say that - second half of '25, we did think that we could get to 1. 15.
`We thought a reasonable chance of getting there, and that's kind of where we're
`10
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 10 of 27 PAGEID #: 10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`looking at towards Q4 as sort of the target. And I think that looks reasonable, but
`I'm not going to get into next year yet
`<Q: Daniel Louis Leonard - UBS - Analyst> I'm curious how you would describe
`the breadth of outperfonnance in Q3. Would you attribute the upside to a narrow
`set of one to two customers? Or was it broader than that?
`<A: August James Troendle> In temis of what, revenue?
`<Q: Daniel Louis Leonard> Yes, exactly. Just looking at the revenue in Q3
`compared to Q2, it looks like the growth came in top 5, it came in metabolic. I'm
`just looking for color on breadth versus what otherwise might suggest that there
`was just a big trial that landed in the quarter.
`<A: August James Troendle> Kevin, do you want to...
`<A: Kevin M. Brady> Yes, Dan, Pd say it's pretty broad-based. I mean, certainly,
`some of that was just influenced by the pass-throughs. I mean pass-throughs
`continue to increase. I think for the quarter, we were right around 42%. So that
`certainly had an influence. But then also just the carryover of the improvements
`that we saw coming out of our conversation in Q2, where we saw improved
`funding in those studies progressing forward, the fewer cancellations in the
`second quarter and that translating further into the third quarter. So it's pretty
`broad-based. I yvouldn 't say it's isolated to a handful of studies.
`<Q: Justin D. Bowers - Deutsche Bank - Research Analyst> Okay. And then in
`terms of the pre-backlog, how does that - how does the therapeutic mix of that
`compare to the revenue that you're showing right now? So just sort of frame things
`a little bit, like oncology is 30% - was 30% in 3 Q and like metabolic was 27%.
`When you look at the pre-backlog, is it over-indexed or under-indexed relative to
`those two therapeutic areas?
`<A: August James Troendle> It's over-indexed in metabolic, as you might expect.
`Not massively, but there's a - it's a higher proportion. And that, again, fits in with
`what we're currently seeing and burning.
`[Emphasis added].
`29. The above statements in Paragraphs 21 to 28 were false and/or materially
`misleading by concealing and misrepresenting Medpace's new business environment and
`cancellation rates. In tmth, Medpace consistently oversold the Company's projected book-to-bill
`ratio for fourth quarter 2025. In fact, Medpace knew or recklessly disregarded the impact that
`11
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 11 of 27 PAGEID #: 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`cancellations have on the Company's book-to-bill ratio. Particularly, Medpace frequently claimed
`that the projection of a 1. 15 book-to-bill ratio for fourth quarter 2025 was reasonable and
`achievable and that cancellations were not a sign of a weak business environment. Furthennore,
`Medpace reassured investors that the Company was not concerned about the lack of diversity in
`its pre-backlog. In fact, Medpace management stated that, despite the uptick in metabolic growth,
`the Company's upside was broad-based and not isolated to any handful of studies.
`The Truth Emerges
`February 9. 2026
`30. On February 9, 2026, after the market closed, Medpace published fourth quarter
`2025 earnings results revealing a book-to-bill ratio of 1. 04, well below the Company's guidance.
`The press release, states, in relevant part:
`Backlog as of December 31, 2025 increased 4. 3% to $3,027. 2 million from
`$2,902. 2 million as of December 31, 2024. Net new business awards were $736.6
`million, representing a net book-to-bill ratio of 1. 04x for the fourth quarter of 2025,
`as compared to $529. 7 million for the comparable prior-year period. The Company
`calculates the net book-to-bill ratio by dividing net new business awards by
`revenue.
`February 10. 2026
`31. On Febmary 10, 2026, Medpace hosted an earnings call in association with the
`Febmary 9, 2026 press release, wherein management discussed the Company's fourth quarter and
`full year 2025 results. In pertinent part, CEO Troendle stated:
`Good day, everyone. Cancellations were elevated again in Q4. Backlog
`cancellations in absolute and percent terms were the highest they've been in over a
`year. This resulted in a lower than anticipated net book-to-bill ratio of 1. 04.
`The good news is that with a backlog conversion rate of 23. 6%, our book-to-bill
`rate does not need to be very high to generate growth. I see no reason to expect the
`higher level of cancellations to continue, but did not anticipate the spike in Q4.
`Only time will tell. Good opportunities continue to present themselves, and I rate
`the overall business environment is adequate and headed in the right direction.
`12
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 12 of 27 PAGEID #: 12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[Emphasis added].
`32. As part of the same call, President Geiger stated, in relevant part:
`Good morning, everyone. Revenue in the fourth quarter of 2025 was $708.5
`million, which represents a year-over-year increase of 32% and full year 2025
`revenue was $2. 53 billion, a 20% increase from 2024. Net new business awards
`entering backlog in the fourth quarter increased 39. 1% firom the prior year to $736.6
`million, resulting in a 1 .04 net book-to-bill. For the full year 2025, net new business
`awards were $2. 65 billion, an increase of 18. 7%. Ending backlog as of December
`31, 2025, was approximately $3 billion, an increase of 4. 3% from the prior year.
`33. As part of the earnings call, Defendants answered analysts questions during a
`question-and-answer segment, in pertinent part:
`<Q: Justin D. Bowers - Deutsche Bank - Analyst> Okay. Is there any way to help
`us understand if the cancellations were normal, what the -- what sort of like the net
`bookings would be? And then with those cancellations, was that - could you help
`characterize those a bit more? Was it in any therapeutic area or customer area,
`vintage?
`<A: August James Troendle> No. Cancellations were a little bit skewed towards
`metabolic area that's been growing quite a bit. So there were a higher level of
`cancellations there. Overall bookings have continued to be oncology our strongest.
`Metabolic still there, but there were some elevated cancellations. So it was kind of
`otherwise relatively non-nal. I don't have a - we're not providing what the booking
`would have been -- we don't give gross bookings. We're just netting them out kind
`of directional magnitude of cancellations, but they would have been substantially
`higher if we had cancellations in a nice range.
`34. Investors and analysts reacted immediately to Medpace's revelation. The price of
`Medpace's common stock declined dramatically. From a closing market price of $530. 35 per share
`on February 9, 2026, Medpace's common stock price fell to $446. 05 per share on Febmary 10,
`2026, a decline of more than 15.9%.
`35. A number of well-known analysts who had been following Medpace expressed
`surprise and concern at the Company's discouraging results. In particular, on February 9, 2026,
`Baird Equity Research published a report titled "Expect Shares Under Pressure Tomorrow"
`following Medpace's press release. The report highlighted Medpace's miss, in pertinent part:
`13
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 13 of 27 PAGEID #: 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Here's the mb: 1) backdrop of sector controversy and valuation collapse, 2) Q4
`bookings miss (1. 04x NBB), 3) 76% ofQ4 growth was from Indirect revenue, 4)
`majority of4Q EPS beat was tax rate, 5) as healthy as 2026 growth outlook is, it is
`a fraction of 2021-2025 levels, while 6) MEDP's peer-relative valuation is stretched
`well beyond norm.
`36. Similarly, on February 1 0, 2026, Tmist published a report titled "Let's Play Q&A:
`Digging into 4Q Cancellations and the Roadmap Into 2026, " wherein analysts lowered Medpace's
`price target to $539 from $555. The report states, in relevant part:
`MEDP shares have historically traded at a premium to other CROs, as the company
`has been viewed as a "preferred" name in the space - supported by strong recent
`results, improving biotech trends (RFPs/pipeline/ funding), high exposure to the
`biotech segment, and its perceived insulation from AI-related noise. As a result, the
`sequential decline in B2B and the increase in cancellations came as a surprise to
`many investors. While the company attributed the softer B2B to higher
`cancellations in metabolic trials and expects cancellations to normalize in 2026,
`investor sentiment took a modest step back, driving shares down 16% today. We
`view MEDP's results as reflective of the inherent volatility in its business model
`given its concentrated exposure, as well as the limited visibility associated with its
`pre-backlog. We revise our estimates and price target, and we reiterate our Hold
`rating.
`37. The fact that these analysts, and others, discussed Medpace's fourth quarter 2025
`book-to-bill miss suggests that the public placed significant weight on Medpace's prior statements.
`The frequent, in-depth discussion by Medpace of the Company's book-to-bill guidance and
`projections confirms that Defendants' statements during the Class Period were material.
`Additional Scienter Allegations
`38. During the Class Period, Defendants acted with scienter in that they knew or
`otherwise were deliberately reckless in not knowing that the public statements disseminated on
`behalf of Medpace were materially false and misleading at the time they were made. Defendants
`had actual knowledge of, or access to, non-public information concerning the Company's pre-
`backlog and how that would translate to Medpace's book-to-bill ratio once cancellations had been
`14
`Case: 1:26-cv-00346-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/06/26 Page: 14 of 27 PAGEID #: 14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`factored into the equation. Despite such knowledge, Defendants repeatedly conveyed to investors
`that a book-to-bill ratio of 1. 15 was a reasonable projection for fourth quarter 2025.
`39. In fact, Defendants knew or deliberately disregarded that the therapeutic segments
`wherein Medpace was observing growth may not remain consistent throughout fourth quarter
`2025. In particular. Defendants assured investors that revenue streams were broad-based and not
`isolated to any few studies. In contrast, the fourth quarter book-to-bill ratio was negatively
`impacted by backlog cancellations, particularly those in the metabolic area.
`Loss Causation and Economic Loss
`40. During the Class Period, as detailed herein, Defendants made materially false and
`misleading statements and engaged in a scheme to deceive the market and a course of conduct that
`artificially inflated the price of Medpace's common stock and operated as a fraud or decei