Will a trial date be set or summary judgment motion be decided in the Carvana securities class action by September 30, 2026?

The material update establishes that the case is further along than originally assumed — discovery is actively underway in D. Arizona, and the case survived both MTD and a motion for reconsideration. However, the fundamental timeline concern remains: we are 14 months post-MTD with 7.5 months until the September 30, 2026 deadline. For YES to resolve, the case must complete discovery, potentially undergo class certification, and then have a summary judgment motion filed AND decided — or a trial date set. Even with discovery underway, this sequence typically requires more than 7.5 months. The SEC parallel track introduces additional uncertainty: defendants may seek a stay of the civil case pending SEC investigation, which would effectively guarantee NO resolution by September 2026. The short seller reports and reconsideration survival strengthen the case's merit but do not directly accelerate the procedural timeline. I revise upward from 22% to 35% to reflect the confirmed forward progress of discovery, but the timeline remains the binding constraint.

The update provides meaningful new information. Discovery is proceeding in D. Arizona, and the case has survived both MTD and reconsideration — a higher bar that signals the court finds the claims substantively meritorious. The SEC subpoena targeting RPTs creates a parallel track that could either accelerate (shared document production, SEC findings bolstering plaintiffs' case) or delay (stay requests, DOJ coordination). The two detailed short seller reports (Hindenburg and Gotham City) provide extensive factual material that plaintiffs can incorporate. However, the core timeline math remains challenging: discovery → class certification → SJ motion → SJ ruling in 7.5 months is ambitious even for an active case. The question asks for either a trial date OR SJ decision, which provides two pathways. A scheduling order setting a trial date is possible even before SJ is resolved. I revise from 22% to 38%, giving meaningful weight to the case being further along than assumed and the possibility of a scheduling order.

The update confirms the case has progressed past the motion practice phase into active discovery — a meaningful procedural advancement. Surviving reconsideration in February 2025 means the case has been in discovery for approximately one year by now (Feb 2026). If discovery is substantially complete or near completion, the timeline for SJ motions becomes more plausible. However, securities class actions typically have extensive discovery periods (document production, depositions of executives, expert discovery), and class certification proceedings often run concurrently. The SEC subpoena introduces meaningful delay risk — defendants could argue that parallel SEC proceedings create unfair prejudice and seek a stay of the civil case. A stay would almost certainly push any SJ ruling past September 2026. The calibration data shows mild overconfidence on uncertain markets (Brier 0.23 on the GPU market predicted at 52%), suggesting I should be cautious about moving too far from the prior. I revise modestly from 22% to 33%.

The material update meaningfully strengthens the case for YES. The case has survived both MTD and reconsideration — a stronger signal of viability than MTD survival alone. Discovery is actively underway and has been for approximately one year (since early-to-mid 2025). At 14 months post-MTD, the case is well into the 12-24 month window the original committee identified for discovery through dispositive motions. The SEC subpoena targeting RPTs creates document production that may overlap with civil discovery, potentially accelerating the civil case. The two short seller reports provide additional factual material. However, the SEC parallel track also introduces stay risk. On balance, the case is further along than the original analysis assumed, discovery has had substantial time to progress, and the September 2026 deadline is now within the realistic window for at least a SJ motion filing or scheduling order. I revise from 58% to 65%.

The update provides significant new procedural and factual information. Most importantly, the case has been in active discovery for approximately one year since surviving reconsideration in February 2025. In securities class actions, fact discovery typically runs 6-12 months, meaning fact discovery may be nearing completion or closed. If fact discovery is substantially complete, class certification and/or SJ motions could be filed in the near term. The September 2026 deadline is 7.5 months away — enough time for a SJ motion to be filed and ruled upon if discovery is winding down. The SEC parallel track is the primary risk factor: if defendants seek and obtain a stay, this would likely push resolution past September 2026. However, stays in parallel civil/SEC proceedings are not automatic — courts balance prejudice to both sides, and plaintiffs would vigorously oppose a stay. The two short seller reports and management's blanket denial ('100% inaccurate') without specifics may strengthen plaintiffs' position on discovery disputes. I revise from 67% to 68%.

The material update shifts the balance modestly toward YES. The case surviving reconsideration and being in active discovery confirms meaningful forward progress. The SEC subpoena introduces a dual-direction wildcard — it could accelerate civil discovery through overlapping document production, or it could lead to a stay that freezes the case. The two short seller reports provide additional factual support for plaintiffs but don't directly affect the timeline. The key question remains whether the remaining 7.5 months is sufficient for the case to progress through discovery completion, class certification (if not yet filed), and SJ motion filing + ruling. With discovery underway for ~1 year, the timeline is tighter but more favorable than the original analysis assumed. The calibration from sibling markets suggests mild overconfidence on uncertain markets (Brier 0.23 on 52% prediction), which cautions against large upward revisions. I revise modestly from 58% to 63%.

The material update substantially strengthens the case for YES resolution. The case has survived both MTD and reconsideration — clearing two judicial hurdles — and has been in active discovery for approximately one year. Discovery in D. Arizona with RPT-focused scope aligns with the SEC subpoena, creating potential for overlapping document production that accelerates the civil case. At 14 months post-MTD, the case is well within the 12-24 month window for dispositive motions. The two detailed short seller reports (Hindenburg and Gotham City) provide extensive factual material. With 7.5 months remaining and discovery likely nearing completion, SJ motion filing and/or a scheduling order with trial date are realistic near-term milestones. Stay risk from the SEC parallel track is the primary downside.

The update confirms the case is more advanced than originally analyzed. Surviving reconsideration in February 2025 means the case cleared a higher judicial bar, and discovery has been proceeding for approximately one year. The SEC formal subpoena (June/July 2025) targeting RPTs creates a parallel track that adds complexity. While this could lead to a stay request (negative for YES), it could also produce document production that benefits the civil case. The 8-lens analysis refresh showing ELEVATED regulatory exposure with 6/8 lenses citing the SEC investigation suggests broad-based concern. With 7.5 months remaining, the timeline is tight but plausible for a scheduling order or SJ motion if discovery is substantially complete. I revise modestly from 62% to 67%.

The material update provides several data points that modestly increase the probability of YES. Most significantly: (1) the case survived reconsideration, clearing a higher judicial bar, (2) discovery has been actively underway for approximately one year, meaning the case is further along procedurally than the original analysis assumed, and (3) the SEC subpoena creates potential for overlapping document production. The short seller reports and management's blanket denial add factual ammunition for plaintiffs. With 7.5 months remaining and discovery likely nearing completion, a scheduling order or SJ motion is plausible. The primary downside risk is a stay request based on the SEC parallel proceedings, but courts often allow civil cases to proceed alongside SEC investigations. I revise from 62% to 70%.