Pfizer Inc. - 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

Pfizer Inc. Summary: The original complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants Pfizer Inc. and certain key officers and/or directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making materially false and misleading statements to artificially inflate the value of Pfizer stock. Specifically, it is alleged that beginning in July 2006, the defendants repeatedly touted the safety and effectiveness of a newly-developed drug, "torcetrapib," that, in combination with Pfizer's cholesterol-reducing Lipitor, purportedly would increase a patient's "good" cholesterol, or HDL. However, unbeknownst to Pfizer shareholders, the product performed much worse than touted. These statements were false and misleading when made because the defendants failed to disclose or indicate that they knew that the torcetrapib was having adverse affects on patients' health, including knowledge that in clinical testing of 15,000 patients, 82 patients died taking torcetrapib/Lipitor combination as compared to only 51 patients taking Lipitor alone, and patients taking torcetrapib showed an increase in angina, congestive heart failure and procedures to clear clogged arteries.

Surprising the market, on December 2, 2006, a mere two days after the Company expressed optimism about prospects for torcetrapib, Pfizer suddenly announced that it was immediately suspending development of torcetrapib following clinical testing of 15,000 patients found that 82 patients taking torcetrapib/Lipitor combination died as compared to 51 patients taking Lipitor alone. These statements were false and misleading when made because the defendants failed to disclose or indicate that they knew that the option grant process was deficient and could cause the Company to restate its financial statements.

The market reacted quickly to these announcements. Pfizer's stock price plummeted to $24.90 per share from its prior trading day close of $27.86 per share, a 10.62% drop in one day, on massive volume of 289,209,504 shares, more than seven times more than the prior day's volume of 40,177,600.

On February 23, 2007, the Court entered the Pretrial Order No. 1 consolidating all related actions and further granting the motion to appoint Uniformed Sanitationmen's Association Local 831, IBT as Lead Plaintiff and granting the motion to appoint Schoengold Sporn Laitman & Lometti, P.C. as Lead Counsel. On April 2, 2007, an Amended Complaint was filed and the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss.

According to an article dated February 29, 2008, in a boost to Pfizer Inc., a federal judge has granted the drug giant's bid to toss the amended complaint in a securities fraud lawsuit brought by investors over the company's decision to scrap its highly anticipated cholesterol drug torcetrapib. Pfizer's knowledge that evidence of torcetrapib’s efficacy was inconclusive did not support an inference that its optimistic statements were materially misleading, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York said Thursday.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2834
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Major Drugs

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Pfizer Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	PFE
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.pfizer.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Uniformed Sanitationmen's Association Local 831, IBT, et al. v. Pfizer Inc., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 06-CV-14199
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 12/06/2006	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/20/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 12/02/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Schoengold Sporn Laitman & Lometti PC 19 Fulton Street, Suite 406, New York, NY, 10038 (voice) (212) 964-0046, (fax) (212) 267-8137, shareholderrelations@spornlaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 12/06/2006
Pretrial Order No. 1
Type: Order		Date on the document: 02/23/2007

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Pfizer Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 06-CV-14199
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan
DATE FILED: 04/02/2007	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/19/2005	CLASS PERIOD END: 12/02/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated Complaint
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Schoengold Sporn Laitman & Lometti PC 19 Fulton Street, Suite 406, New York, NY, 10038 (voice) (212) 964-0046, (fax) (212) 267-8137, shareholderrelations@spornlaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/02/2007
Memorandum Opinion
Type: Order		Date on the document: 02/28/2008
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Declaration		Date on the document: 02/28/2008

OTHER DOCUMENTS

Case Name and/or Number:
Type:		Date on the document:

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

�