Flamel Technologies SA - 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

Flamel Technologies SA Summary: The complaint charges Flamel and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Flamel is a biopharmaceutical company that develops polymer-based delivery technologies for medical applications. Its lead product is COREG CR for use in the treatment of moderate to severe congestive heart failure, left ventricular dysfunction following myocardial infarction and hypertension.

According to the complaint, throughout the Class Period, defendants made a series of false and misleading statements regarding the prospects for COREG CR. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants were in possession of undisclosed clinical trial data showing that Coreg CR was no more effective than Coreg IR, the twice-daily version of the drug.

On August 23, 2007, in an article entitled “Flamel Technologies Shares Dive on Disappointing Coreg Study Results,” the Associated Press reported that a study of its once-daily heart disease drug failed to show any benefit over the twice-daily version. On this news, Flamel’s ADR price dropped from $12.68 to $9.56 per share. This decrease in Flamel’s ADR price was a result of the artificial inflation caused by defendants’ misleading statements coming out of the ADR price.

As summarized by the Company’s FORM 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, on November 9, 2007 a putative class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Company and certain of its current and former officers entitled Billhofer v. Flamel Technologies, et al. The complaint purports to allege claims arising under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 based on certain public statements by the Company concerning, among other things, a clinical trial involving Coreg CR and seeks the award of damages in an unspecified amount. By Order dated February 11, 2008, the Court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel in the action. Pursuant to an agreed-upon scheduling order, the lead plaintiff, on March 27, 2008, filed an amended complaint which continued to name as defendants the Company and certain previously named officers and directors but omitted other persons who had initially been sued and asserted the same claims based on the same events as alleged in the initial complaint. On May 12, 2008, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the entire action with prejudice. That motion has been fully briefed and is awaiting resolution by the Court. None of the individual defendants named in the amended complaint have been served in the action and they did not join in the Company’s motion.

On July 01, 2010, Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure it was stipulated and agreed between and among the parties that one of the defendants be voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.

On September 20, 2010, the formerly appointed Lead Plaintiff Billhofer's motion to withdraw as Lead Plaintiff was granted, and another plaintiff was substituted as Lead Plaintiff in this action.

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

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Flamel Technologies SA
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	FLML
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.flamel-technologies.fr

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Christel Billhofer, et al. v. Flamel Technologies SA, et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-09920
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Charles S. Haight
DATE FILED: 11/09/2007	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/23/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/22/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville) 200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, info@csgrr.com/ Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.231.1058, (fax) 619.231.7423, info@csgrr.com/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 11/09/2007
Stipulation And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 12/05/2007
Order Appointing Plaintiff And Approving Selection Of Lead Counsel
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 02/13/2008

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Christel Billhofer, et al. v. Flamel Technologies SA, et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-09920
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 03/27/2008	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/23/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/22/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated Complaint
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville) 58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, info@csgrr.com/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Amended Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws Demand For Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/27/0008
Notice Of Motion By Flamel Technologies, SA To Dismiss The Amended Complaint
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 05/12/2008
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 02/03/2010
Stipulation Of Voluntary Dismissal Of Defendant Rafael Jorda Without Prejudice
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/01/2010
Opinion
Type: Other		Date on the document: 09/21/2010
Order Amending Case Management Order Dated December 9, 2009
Type: Order		Date on the document: 10/01/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/18/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 08/19/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Other		Date on the document: 01/31/2012

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

�