Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 06/08/2006 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: March 10, 2005

According to a press release dated June 9, 2006, Cell Therapeutics (CTI) reports that US District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez has granted CTI's motion to dismiss a private securities fraud class-action lawsuit alleging false statements by company officers. The Judge's decision was issued May 4 but went into permanent effect on June 8.

The original complaint charges CTI and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that contrary to the defendant's express and repeated representations the results of STELLAR 3 trial were not encouraging; (2) that XYOTAX failed to boost survival for non-small cell lung cancer: (3) that XYOTAX failed to show greater survival benefit than Taxol, the leading drug on the market; and (4) that based on the results of the trial the Company would not be able to begin pre-launch activities and to position itself to submit a new drug application for XYOTAX.

The complaint further alleges that on or around March 7, 2005, prior to the opening of the market, CTI announced that a phase III study of XYOTAX in combination with carboplatin, known as STELLAR 3, missed its primary endpoint. News of this shocked the market. Shares fell $4.75 per share or 47.5 percent, on March 7, 2005, to close at $5.25 per share, on unusually high volume.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CTIC
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: W.D. Washington
DOCKET #: 05-CV-00396
JUDGE: Hon. Ricardo Martinez
DATE FILED: 03/10/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/07/2004
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/04/2005
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Chitwood & Harley LLP (Atlanta)
  2. Dyer & Shuman, LLP
  3. Keller Rohrback LLP (Seattle)
  4. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
  5. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville)
  6. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
  7. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
  8. Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
  9. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
  10. Schoengold & Sporn PC (New York)
  11. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
  12. Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC
  13. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: W.D. Washington
DOCKET #: 05-CV-00396
JUDGE: Hon. Ricardo Martinez
DATE FILED: 11/07/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/14/2003
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/07/2005
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
  2. Keller Rohrback LLP (Seattle)
  3. Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy
  4. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
  5. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
  6. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
  7. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
  8. Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
  9. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
  10. Schoengold Sporn Laitman & Lometti PC
  11. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
  12. Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC
  13. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
  14. The Emerson Firm
  15. Weiss & Lurie (New York, NY)
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date