Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 09/05/2002 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: February 05, 2002

On October 3, 2002, the plaintiffs filed an appeal but the appeal was later dismissed.

According to a press release dated September 6, 2002, Biopure Corporation announced that the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has dismissed the putative securities class action litigation brought against Biopure and the company's former chairman and chief executive officer in early 2002. On September 4, 2002, Senior District Judge Edward F. Harrington issued an order granting the company's motion to dismiss the case in its entirety with prejudice. "I'm pleased we've prevailed in this matter. Although the plaintiffs in this class action were only a few individuals, I want to assure all Biopure shareholders that the Board of Directors and senior management are dedicated to building investor confidence and shareholder value," said Biopure Chairman Dr. Charles A. Sanders. The purported class action was the consolidation of five different complaints filed against Biopure and Carl W. Rausch in the District Court between February 5, 2002 and March 15, 2002. The plaintiffs, eight individual shareholders, claimed that Biopure violated federal securities law. However, Judge Harrington found that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.

The original Complaint alleges that Biopure, a leading developer, manufacturer
and marketer of a new class of pharmaceuticals it calls "oxygen
therapeutics," and the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
by issuing materially false and misleading statements concerning the
likely timing of the Company's filing with the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration ("FDA") of its Biologic License Application ("BLA") to
market Hemopure, Biopure's experimental blood substitute for patients
undergoing elective surgery. In particular, defendants led investors to
believe that the BLA was on track to be filed by year-end 2001.

As alleged in the Complaint, these statements were materially false
and misleading because, by commencement of the Class Period, defendants
knew or recklessly ignored the fact that the data collected from the
Hemopure trial (which had been completed in August 2000) was
significantly deficient and failed to demonstrate that the trial had
been conducted in an "adequate and well-controlled" manner. As such,
plaintiff asserts that the data lacked reliability, thereby making any
application unlikely to be accepted for filing, much less approved, by
the FDA. It is further alleged that defendants also knew that the FDA
would not allow a BLA to be filed where the data lacked "prima facie"
reliability.

On December 6, 2001, the Company announced that it would not file the
Hemopure application until mid-2002, contrary to repeated prior
assertions that the BLA would be filed in 2001. Biopure blamed the delay
on "additional facility and process validation requirements" for its
Cambridge, Massachusetts manufacturing plant. Plaintiff asserts that
this was merely a pretext for the delay, which in fact was occasioned by
the data deficiencies that had arisen during the clinical trial. As a
result of the postponement, the price of Biopure stock fell to less than
$15 per share, well below the $20 plateau above which the stock traded
throughout most of the Class Period.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: BPUR
Company Market: NASDAQ
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 02-CV-10194
JUDGE: Hon. Edward F. Harrington
DATE FILED: 02/05/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/08/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/06/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brian Felgoise
    230 South Broad Street, Suite 404 , Brian Felgoise, PA 19102
    215.735.6810 215/735.5185. ·
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR)
    P.O. Box 25438, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR), AR 72221-5438
    501.312.8500 501.312.8505 ·
  3. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
    World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A., MD 21202
    410.332.0030 · pivenlaw@erols.com
  4. Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence)
    335 Central Avenue, Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence), NY 11559
    516.374.0707 516.295.3473 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
  5. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
  6. Wechsler Harwood LLP
    488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, Wechsler Harwood LLP, NY 10022
    212.935.7400 · info@whhf.com
  7. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
    270 Madison Avenue, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.545.4600 212.686.0114 · newyork@whafh.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 02-CV-10194
JUDGE: Hon. Edward F. Harrington
DATE FILED: 05/31/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/08/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/21/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Adkins & Kelston, P.C.
    90 Canal Street - 5th Floor, Adkins & Kelston, P.C., MA 2114
    617.367.1040 · info@akzlaw.com
  2. Brian Felgoise
    230 South Broad Street, Suite 404 , Brian Felgoise, PA 19102
    215.735.6810 215/735.5185. ·
  3. Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania)
    11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania), PA 19004
    610.668.7987 610.660.0450 · esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com
  4. Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates (Boca Raton, FL)
    2255 Glades Road Suite 421A, Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates (Boca Raton, FL), FL 33431
    561.750.3000 ·
  5. Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy
    265 Llwyds Lane, Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy, FL 32963
    561.231.4202 ·
  6. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
    World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A., MD 21202
    410.332.0030 · pivenlaw@erols.com
  7. Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence)
    335 Central Avenue, Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence), NY 11559
    516.374.0707 516.295.3473 · securitiesfraud@comcast.net
  8. Law Offices of Richard J. Vita (Boston)
    77 Franklin Street, 3rd Floor, Law Offices of Richard J. Vita (Boston), MA 02110
    617.426.6566 ·
  9. Perkins, Smith & Cohen
    1 Beacon Street , Perkins, Smith & Cohen, MA 02108
    617.854.4000 ·
  10. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
  11. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  12. Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian & Feffer, LLP
    488 Madison Avenue, Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian & Feffer, LLP, NY
    212.935.7400 10022 ·
  13. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
    270 Madison Avenue, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.545.4600 212.686.0114 · newyork@whafh.com
No Document Title Filing Date