Elan Corporation, plc - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Elan Corporation, plc Summary: Plaintiffs appealed the lower court's ruling of dismissal and on September 15, 2008 the United States Court of Appeals issued a mandate withdrawing it.

According to an article dated March 31, 2008, a federal district judge has tossed out a proposed class action against Elan Corp. and its executives brought by investors who claim the Irish company artificially pumped up its stock price by misleading the public about problems connected to its multiple sclerosis drug Tysabri. U.S. District Judge Richard Holwell dismissed the suit Friday but gave the plaintiffs the chance to go back to the drawing board and file an amended complaint against the biotechnology company in the future, according to papers filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. “Because the court finds that plaintiffs have failed to adequately plead both materiality and scienter, we do not reach the remaining arguments offered by defendants in support of their motion to dismiss,” court documents stated. “Defendants' motion is granted, and plaintiffs' complaint is dismissed in its entirety.”

On February 16, 2007, a Consolidated Class Action Complaint was filed. The Defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint. The motion is currently pending before the Court.

On August 20, 2005, the case was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to the Southern District of New York. On August 9, 2005, the Court entered the Memorandum Opinion and Order #91980 signed by U.S. District Judge Richard J. Holwell consolidating all the SDNY actions and appointing the Institutional Investor Group as lead plaintiff and designating Milberg Weiss and Entwistle and Cappucci LLP as co-lead counsel. On February 24, 2006, the Court entered the Order consolidating all the actions and designating 05cv2860 as Lead Case.

The original complaint charges Elan and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Elan is engaged in the development and commercialization of TYSABRI, a vaccine designed to treat patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), slowing the progression of the disease and reducing incidents of relapses. Throughout the Class Period, defendants caused Elan to make a number of positive statements about the status of its clinical trials and the commercial potential of TYSABRI, causing Elan's stock to trade at artificially inflated prices. The Complaint alleges that Elan violated federal securities laws by issuing false or misleading information. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts: (i) that TYSABRI(r) (natalizumab), a monoclonal antibody for the treatment of Multiple Sclerosis (``MS''), posed serious immune-system side effects; (ii) that TYSABRI, like other MS drugs, made patients susceptible to progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (``PML'') by changing the way certain white blood cells function, thereby allowing PML, a normally dormant virus, to run rampant within the human body; (iii) that defendants knew and/or recklessly disregarded documented facts that MS drugs can cause greater incidents of PML to occur; and (iv) that defendants concealed these facts in order to fast track TYSABRI for FDA approval so that they could reap the financial benefits from the sales of the drug.

Further, on or around February 28, 2005, Elan shocked the market by reporting that they were withdrawing TYSABRI from the market following reports of patients contracting PML, with at least one instance resulting in death. As a result of this announcement, Elan's shares plummeted, declining over 70% to approximately $8 per share on February 28, 2005.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2834
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Elan Corporation, Plc
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	ELN
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.elan.com/

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Wendell Williams, et al. v. Elan Corporation, plc, et al.

COURT: D. Massachusetts	DOCKET NUMBER: 05-CV-10413
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Joseph L. Tauro
DATE FILED: 3/3/2005	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 2/18/2004	CLASS PERIOD END: 2/25/2005
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Johnson & Perkinson 1690 Williston Road, South Burlington, VT, 05403 (voice) 802.862.0030, (fax) 802.862.0060, JPLAW@adelphia.net Krislov & Associates, Ltd. 20 North Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL, 60606 (voice) 312606.0500, (fax) 312.606.0207, mail@krislovlaw.com Law Office of Peter A. Lagorio 63 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, MA, 02110 (voice) 617-367-4200, (fax) 617-227-3384, plagorio@conversent.net Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York) One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) 212.868.1229, info@milbergweiss.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Stull, Stull & Brody (New York) 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY, 10017 (voice) 310.209.2468, (fax) 310.209.2087, SSBNY@aol.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 3/4/2005
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 08/30/2005

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Elan Corporation, plc Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 05-CV-02860
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Richard J. Holwell
DATE FILED: 2/16/2007	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 2/18/2004	CLASS PERIOD END: 2/28/2005
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Entwistle & Cappucci LLP 299 Park Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY, 10171 (voice) 212.894.7200, (fax) 212.894.7272, info@entwistle-law.com Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York) One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) 212.868.1229, info@milbergweiss.com Milberg Weiss LLP (New York) One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) 212.868.1229, info@milbergweiss.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 8/8/2005
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 09/22/2006
Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/16/2007
Memorandum Order and Opinion
Type: Order		Date on the document: 3/27/2008
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 9/15/2008

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Case Name and/or Number: Sidney D. Feldman Family Trust, et al. v. Elan Corp., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/14/2005

WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.

Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top

�