Sanofi-Aventis - 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

Sanofi-Aventis Summary: According to a law firm press release, a class action was filed against Sanofi-Aventis on November 13, 2007. The complaint charges Sanofi and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Sanofi-Aventis engages in the research, development, manufacture, and marketing of healthcare products worldwide.

Sanofi is the third largest pharmaceutical company in the world. According to the complaint, in 2002, Sanofi began testing a new drug, Zimulti, which is designed to fight obesity by reducing appetite. As the first drug of its class, Zimulti was projected to become extremely profitable for Sanofi. Sanofi submitted its New Drug Application (“NDA”) for Zimulti in April 2005 and on June 23, 2005, the Company announced that the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) had accepted it for filing. The complaint alleges that defendants’ statements regarding Zimulti were materially false and misleading when made because defendants concealed data concerning Zimulti’s propensity to cause depression.

On June 13, 2007, the committee met and made a unanimous decision that Zimulti could not be recommended for approval. After the FDA’s decision on June 13, 2007, Sanofi’s securities declined $1.87, or 4.16%, closing at $43.07 on heavy trading volume.

On February 29,2008, Order Appointing The Global, Funds As Lead Plaintiff And Approving Lead Plaintiff's Selection Of Lead Counsel. On April 29, 2008, a Consolidated Complaint For Violations Of Securities Laws was filed with the court by the lead plaintiffs.

On September 26, 2009, Defendants motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) was granted pursuant to the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated September 25, 2009.

On October 9, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the September 26, 2009 Order. On July 27, 2010, the motion for reconsideration was granted. The plaintiffs were given leave to file an Amended Complaint, and on July 28, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint.

On July 28, 2010, the lead plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint against the defendants.

On March 30, 2011, a Memorandum Decision and Order was issued by the Court Denying the Defendants motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs' Section 20(a) Claim was Dismissed as to certain Individual Defendants. Plaintiffs' motion for the issuance of a letter of request pursuant to the Hague Convention was also Denied without prejudice to renew after the parties engage in discovery.

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

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Sanofi-Aventis
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	SNY
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.sanofi-aventis.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

City of Taylor General Employees Retirement System, et al. v. Sanofi-Aventis, et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-10279
JUDGE NAME: Hon. George B. Daniels
DATE FILED: 11/13/2007	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/17/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 06/13/2007
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/ 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: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 11/13/2007
Order Appointing The Global, Funds As Lead Plaintiff And Approving Lead Plaintiff's Selection Of Lead Counsel.
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 02/29/2008

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In re Sanofi-Aventis Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-10279
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 07/28/2010	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/20/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 06/13/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended
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/ 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 REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Complaint For Violations Of Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/29/2008
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 09/25/2009
Judgment
Type: Other		Date on the document: 09/26/2009
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 07/27/2010
First Amended Complaint For Violation Of Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 07/28/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/30/2010
Memorandum Decision And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/30/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/30/2011
Order
Type: Other		Date on the document: 04/04/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/13/2011
Order For Admission Pro Hac Vice On Written Motion
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/03/2011
Memorandum Decision And Order
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/13/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Other		Date on the document: 08/30/2011

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

�