Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 03/25/2008 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: June 03, 2005

According to a press release dated March 24, 2008, Possis Medical, Inc, a developer, manufacturer and marketer of pioneering medical devices used in endovascular procedures, announced that the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has affirmed the Federal District Court's dismissal of a shareholder lawsuit that was filed June 5, 2005. The suit had alleged that Possis Medical violated federal securities laws by misrepresenting material information about the Company’s AngioJet® Rheolytic™ Thrombectomy System prior to the August 2004 public disclosure of the results of the Company’s AiMI clinical trial. The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota had previously dismissed with prejudice the consolidated amended complaint in a shareholder class action lawsuit filed against Possis Medical and two of its executive officers, entitled “In re Possis Medical, Inc., Securities Litigation.”

In a press release dated March 25, 2007, Possis Medical, Inc., announced that the dismissal of the lawsuit entitled "In re Possis Securities Litigation" against Possis Medical has been appealed. Plaintiffs in the securities litigation entitled "In re Possis Securities Litigation", which was dismissed with prejudice by the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota in early February, filed on March 3, 2007, a notice of appeal of the trial court's decision with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit.

In a press release dated February 5, 2007, Possis Medical, Inc., announced that the United States District Court for Minnesota has dismissed, with prejudice, the consolidated amended complaint in a shareholder class action lawsuit filed against Possis Medical and two of its executive officers, entitled "In re Possis Medical, Inc., Securities Litigation." The dismissed shareholder suit, filed in June 2005, arose from allegations concerning public statements made prior to the August 2004 public disclosure of Possis Medical's AiMI clinical study results. The case consolidated multiple purported class actions and, although no class had yet been certified, the court had appointed lead plaintiffs in August 2005. Possis Medical filed its Motion to Dismiss shortly thereafter and oral arguments were heard in March 2006.

On September 6, 2005, the Court entered the Order consolidating the actions, appointing lead plaintiffs and approving lead plaintiffs’ selection of lead counsel and liaison counsel. On November 4, 2005, a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint was filed. The defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on December 19, 2005.

Several purported shareholder class action lawsuits have been filed against Possis and certain of the Company's executive officers with violations of federal securities laws. Plaintiff claims defendants' omissions and material misrepresentations during the Class Period artificially inflated Possis' stock price, inflicting damages on investors. Possis develops, manufactures, and markets medical devices, including the AngioJet System - a non-surgical, minimally invasive catheter system designed to rapidly remove blood clots using a stream of water.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants failed to disclose and/or misrepresented material adverse facts, including that: (a) the AngioJet System, the Company's key product, was not more effective than existing alternatives, including competing drug therapies, nor did AngioJet reduce significant procedural complications or significantly increase positive benefits such as improved blood flow or other similar effects; (b) the AngioJet could not be expanded as a "technology platform" because AngioJet was not in the first instance effective for routine use in a broad range of heart attack patients to reduce the size of a patient's damaged tissue area; and (c) as a result of the foregoing problems, Possis could not maintain its projected revenue growth or achieve sustained revenue growth targets as high as 35%.

The Complaint further alleges that defendants were motivated to and did conceal the true safety and efficacy of AngioJet, and defendants' ability to expand and develop Possis' AngioJet technology, because it enabled defendants to artificially inflate the price of Possis shares and then allowed defendants and other Company insiders to sell more than 361,730 shares of their privately held Possis stock to the unsuspecting public for proceeds in excess of $7.07 million while in possession of material adverse, non-public information about the Company.

On or around August 24, 2004, it was disclosed that AngioJet failed to demonstrate clinical superiority in the majority of heart attack patients, causing Possis' share price to plummet more than 38%. As a result, the Company lost almost 40% of its market capitalization after Possis shares traded down more than $11.75 per share, to $19.00 per share, as defendants lowered the Company's 2005 earnings and revenue guidance.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Medical Equipment & Supplies
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: POSS
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. Minnesota
DOCKET #: 05-CV-1084
JUDGE: Hon. James M. Rosenbaum
DATE FILED: 06/03/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/24/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/24/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. Dreier, Bartiz & Federman LLP
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Dreier, Bartiz & Federman LLP, OK 73102
    405.235.1560 · wfederman@aol.com
  3. Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City)
    120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City), OK 73102
    405-235-1560 · wfederman@aol.com
  4. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (NY)
    1501 Broadway, Suite 1416, Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (NY), NY 10036
    917.510.000 646.366-089 · info@glancylaw.com
  5. 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
  6. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), NY 10119
    212.594.5300 212.868.1229 · info@milbergweiss.com
  7. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  8. Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield Attorneys at Law
    E-1000 First National Bank Building, 332 Minnesota Street, Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield Attorneys at Law, MN 55101
    800.465.1592 651.297.6543 · info@ralawfirm.com
  9. Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
    330 Main Street, Schatz & Nobel, P.C., CT 06106
    800.797.5499 860.493.6290 · sn06106@AOL.com
  10. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
    P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut), CT 06415
    860.537.5537 860.537.4432 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
  11. The Emerson Firm
    2228 Cottondale Avenue, Suite 100, The Emerson Firm, AR 72202
    800.663.9817 501.907.2556 · epllp@emersonpoynter.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Minnesota
DOCKET #: 05-CV-1084
JUDGE: Hon. James M. Rosenbaum
DATE FILED: 11/04/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/21/2004
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/24/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), NY 10119
    212.594.5300 212.868.1229 · info@milbergweiss.com
  2. Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield Attorneys at Law
    E-1000 First National Bank Building, 332 Minnesota Street, Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield Attorneys at Law, MN 55101
    800.465.1592 651.297.6543 · info@ralawfirm.com
No Document Title Filing Date