Telik, Inc. Summary: The original complaint charges Telik and certain of its officers and directors and its underwriters for the Offerings with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities Act of 1933. Telik is a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery, development, and commercialization of small molecule drugs for the treatment of cancer and inflammatory diseases. Telik’s lead product candidate during the Class Period was TELCYTA, a small molecule cancer drug product designed to be activated in cancer cells.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements about the Company’s business and prospects, including that they were on track to obtain FDA approval for the use of TELCYTA in the treatment of platinum-resistant or refractory ovarian cancer and small-cell lung cancer, and that TELCYTA was safe and effective for public use and the Company had conducted sufficient clinical studies to prove it. The complaint futher alleges that, unbeknownst to the investing public, subjects in the TELCYTA trials were dying at alarming rates and doctors were pulling other subjects out early, compromising the data being gathered. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading Class Period statements and omissions, Telik’s stock traded at inflated levels during the Class Period, trading as high as $29.04 per share by April 2004, whereby the Company sold over $322 million worth of Telik stock in the Offerings. The Registration Statements and Prospectuses issued in connection with the Offerings were also false and misleading as they misstated the known safety and integrity flaws in the TELCYTA clinical trials.
The complaint further alleges that on December 26, 2006, the Company announced that TELCYTA had failed in three arms of its final clinical testing – showing no efficacy in two of the three arms and unreliable clinical data in two of the three arms. The Company’s stock plunged 70% in a single trading session – falling from over $16 per share to below $5 per share. The Company’s stock price fell by another 20% on June 4, 2007, following disclosure of just how badly the ovarian cancer arm of the TELCYTA trials had failed, and then nearly 30% to $3.42 per share on June 5, 2007, after the Company disclosed that the FDA had ordered Telik to immediately halt all TELCYTA clinical trials due to the alarming number of fatalities.
As summarized by the Company’s Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2008, beginning on June 6, 2007, a series of putative securities class action lawsuits were commenced in the United States District Courts for the Southern District of New York and the Northern District of California, naming as defendants Telik, Inc. and certain of our current officers, one of whom is also a director. The complaints filed in the Southern District of New York, which were consolidated and amended in 2007, also name as defendants the underwriters of our November 2003 and/or January 2005 stock offerings. Plaintiffs in the Northern District of California subsequently voluntarily dismissed their complaints without prejudice. The complaints alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 arising out of the issuance of allegedly false and misleading statements about our business and prospects, including the efficacy, safety and likelihood of success of our product candidate TELCYTA. The allegations of the consolidated amended complaint were similar, but more narrow than the original complaints. Plaintiffs sought unspecified damages and injunctive relief on behalf of purchasers of our common stock during the period between March 27, 2003 and June 4, 2007, including purchasers in the January 2005 stock offering. In January 2008, the parties to the securities class action reached an agreement in principle to settle the claims, the settlement to be funded primarily by proceeds from insurance. In October 2008, the court entered a final judgment approving the [$5 million cash] settlement and resolving all class claims.
On September 29, 2008, an objector filed a notice of appeal from the order approving the settlement. On October 9, 2008, an amended notice of appeal was filed in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. On December 7, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the district court.
SIC Code: 2834
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
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