On 2 October 2026, a shareholder named Chris Stewart filed a securities class-action complaint in the Northern District of California against Alphabet Inc., its chief executive Sundar Pichai and its chief financial officer Anat Ashkenazi (case 3:26-cv-11290). The complaint alleges that statements about when Gemini 3.5 Pro would launch were materially false or misleading. We read the complaint in full, and Google’s 30 September announcement of Gemini 4 Argon, and have not checked the allegations independently.
Business Pill · A DATE SAID OUT LOUD
A one-minute explainer of the idea behind this story: a forecast versus a commitment. It teaches the concept, not this story’s figures.
The key insight: The complaint quotes Pichai on 19 May saying “Give us until next month to get it to you” and on 3 June saying “we expect Gemini 3.5 Pro will be coming in June”, and alleges both were materially false or misleading. It also quotes him on 22 July saying the model was “currently in testing”. This publication takes no view on any of it.
The complaint defines a class period of 19 May 2026 to 16 July 2026, inclusive, for people who bought or otherwise acquired Alphabet securities. It says the period begins on 19 May, when Alphabet held its annual Google I/O developer conference.
The complaint says Pichai announced at the conference that Gemini 3.5 Pro would arrive in June 2026. It quotes him: “Give us until next month to get it to you.” It adds that Pichai said the chatbot was “showing great improvements” compared with previous versions.
The complaint says a second statement came on 3 June 2026, at what it calls a Special Investor Call on AI-driven growth, infrastructure investment and strategic focus areas. It quotes Pichai: “Gemini 3.5 Flash is now available, and we expect Gemini 3.5 Pro will be coming in June.”
The complaint says these two statements, which it sets out in paragraphs 18 and 19, were materially false or misleading. The statements it quotes are attributed to Pichai. It names Ashkenazi as chief financial officer and says both executives had the power to control the contents of company reports to the SEC, press releases and presentations to analysts and investors.
The dates in the complaint, with the statements as it quotes them. The Bloomberg and Reuters lines are second-hand quotes inside the complaint. All of it is the plaintiff’s allegation, and this publication verified none of it independently.
What the Complaint Says Was Not Disclosed
The complaint says the defendants failed to disclose three things. First, that Gemini 3.5 Pro “was delivering disappointing training results.” Second, that as a result its launch “would be significantly delayed.” Third, that as a result the defendants’ positive statements about the company were materially misleading or lacked a reasonable basis.
The complaint says that on 16 July 2026, at approximately 2:00 PM EST, Bloomberg reported that Google was “months behind schedule on delivering Gemini 3.5 Pro, its most powerful flagship AI model.” It quotes the report as saying: “[l]ate last month, Google updated the data being used to train Gemini in an attempt to improve [its] skills, but the results were disappointing.” This publication did not read the Bloomberg report, and the words are as the complaint quotes them.
The complaint says that “on this news” the Class A common stock of Alphabet fell $16.46, or 4.4%, to close at $354.46 per share on 16 July, on “unusually heavy trading volume.” It says the Class C stock fell $16.39, or 4.4%, to close at $353.58. It also says the stock closed at a class-period high of $390.13 on 28 May. These are the complaint’s figures, and this publication did not check them against market data.
What the Complaint Says Came Later
The complaint says that on 22 July 2026, after the market closed, Alphabet released its second-quarter results. It quotes Pichai on the related call: “Gemini 3.5 Pro is currently in testing and our team is already building the next generation of models. We have started our most ambitious pretraining run yet for Gemini 4 and are excited by the progress we are seeing at the frontier.”
The complaint adds that on that date “[n]o additional details on the expected commercial launch, customer adoption, or financial impact of Gemini 3.5 Pro were provided.”
The complaint says that on 30 September 2026 Google announced it would release Gemini 4 Argon, which had already been rolled out to “a set of trusted cyber defenders through [its] Fairwind Program.” It says Google stated it was “actively engaged in the U.S. government’s voluntary process for pre-release model access while [it] gradually expand[s] access.”
The complaint says that the same day Reuters reported that “Google no longer plans to release Gemini 3.5 Pro.” This publication did not read the Reuters report and cannot confirm that line.
What Google’s Own Post Says
Google’s 30 September post on the Google DeepMind blog says: “Today, we’re announcing our new frontier model, Gemini 4 Argon, which is rolling out to a set of trusted cyber defenders through our Fairwind Program.” It also says: “We are actively engaged in the U.S. government’s voluntary process for pre-release model access while we gradually expand access.” The two phrases the complaint quotes from the post appear in its text.
This publication searched the post’s text for “3.5” and found no mention of Gemini 3.5 Pro.
The Claims and the Relief the Complaint Seeks
The complaint brings two claims. The first is under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, against all three defendants. The second is under Section 20(a), against Pichai and Ashkenazi as alleged controlling persons.
The complaint pleads that the individual defendants had actual knowledge that the statements were false or misleading, or “acted with reckless disregard for the truth.” It bases this on their senior positions and their access to company information. That is the plaintiff’s allegation.
The complaint says the statutory safe harbor for forward-looking statements does not apply, because “[t]he statements alleged to be false and misleading herein all relate to then-existing facts and conditions.” It adds that, to the extent any were forward-looking, they were not identified as such when made and carried no meaningful cautionary statements. That is the plaintiff’s position.
The prayer for relief asks the court to certify the class, to award compensatory damages “in an amount to be proven at trial, including interest thereon,” and to award costs, expenses and counsel and expert fees. It demands a jury trial. The complaint does not state a damages figure.
The Structural Read
The complaint is built on a timeline. It sets two dated statements, on 19 May and 3 June, against a Bloomberg report it cites on 16 July, and it ends the class period on that date. It then adds two later items, the 22 July call and a Reuters line of 30 September, which by the dates fall after the class period it defines.
The complaint’s safe-harbor section treats the statements as ones about “then-existing facts and conditions”, not as forward-looking statements. That is the plaintiff’s framing, and no response from the defendants has been read.
The reason the complaint gives for the alleged delay is “disappointing training results”. It states this in its own list of undisclosed facts and attributes a similar account to the Bloomberg report, which this publication did not read.
The complaint, paragraph 6, on what it alleges was not disclosed
“that the Gemini 3.5 Pro was delivering disappointing training results”
Three Implications
WHAT THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES That statements on 19 May and 3 June about a June launch were materially false or misleading, and that three facts were not disclosed. These are the plaintiff’s allegations, and no ruling appears in the documents read.
WHAT GOOGLE’S OWN POST SAYS That Gemini 4 Argon is rolling out to a set of trusted cyber defenders, and that Google is engaged in the U.S. government’s voluntary process for pre-release model access. This publication found no mention of Gemini 3.5 Pro in the post.
WHAT THE SOURCES LEAVE OPEN Whether any statement was misleading, what Google has decided about Gemini 3.5 Pro, and how the court will treat the claims are not established. This publication read no response from any defendant and verified none of the allegations.
What Is Not Established
This publication read the 18-page complaint, CourtListener’s docket page for the case and Google’s 30 September post. It did not read the Bloomberg report of 16 July or the Reuters report of 30 September, did not check the quoted statements against transcripts or recordings of Google I/O, the 3 June Special Investor Call or the 22 July earnings call, and did not check the stock prices. It read no response from Alphabet, Pichai or Ashkenazi.
The docket page, a mirror of court records last updated on 2 October, lists one entry: the complaint. CourtListener says items on the page may not be up to date. No ruling on any claim appears in the documents read.
None of the documents read states the current status of Gemini 3.5 Pro. The complaint quotes Pichai on 22 July saying it was “currently in testing,” and quotes a Reuters line from 30 September, which this publication did not confirm.
A complaint is an allegation. What each statement meant, whether it was misleading, and the link the complaint draws between the Bloomberg report and the price move are the plaintiff’s account. This publication takes no view on them.
The Map of AI — How the Layers of the Stack Depend on One Another
The Map of AI places more than 200 companies across nine layers of the stack, from silicon to application, and shows how the layers depend on one another.
A shareholder’s complaint filed on 2 October alleges that Pichai’s statements on 19 May and 3 June about a June launch of Gemini 3.5 Pro were materially false or misleading, and that the delay was disclosed through a Bloomberg report on 16 July. The complaint quotes a Reuters line of 30 September saying Google no longer plans to release the model. Google’s own post of that date, as read here, does not mention it. The complaint is an allegation, no ruling appears in the documents read, and this publication verified none of it independently.
A note on sourcing. We drew this piece from the complaint in Stewart v. Alphabet Inc. (N.D. Cal. 3:26-cv-11290), CourtListener’s docket page, and Google’s 30 September post, all of which we read directly. We did not read the Bloomberg or Reuters reports the complaint cites. The complaint is an advocacy document, and its contents are allegations we have not checked independently. We did not contact any defendant, and no defendant response informed our reporting. Nothing here is a forecast or legal or investment advice.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
Scroll to Top
Discover more from FourWeekMBA
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
