Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/16/2013 (Other)

Filing Date: July 29, 2009

The Complaint charges that defendants violated federal securities laws. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants concealed deficiencies at two of its manufacturing facilities, which caused a shortage in one of its top-selling products (a drug called Myozyme) and delayed approval of a new formulation of that product (a drug known as Lumizyme). The manufacturing problems also forced Genzyme to halt production of two other top-selling products (drugs called Cerezyme and Fabrazyme) due to contamination at one of the manufacturing facilities.

On July 22, 2009, Genzyme slashed its earnings and revenue forecasts for 2009, including its revenue projections for Myozyme, Cerezyme and Fabrazyme, due to the impact of the facility shutdown. During the class period, Genzyme's stock has fallen over 35%, resulting in a loss of over $8 billion to investors.

On November 13, 2009, an order was entered into the docket by the court appointing lead plaintiff, lead counsel, and consolidating the cases.

On February 19, 2010, an order was entered by the Court consolidating more cases to the docket.

On March 01, 2010, a amended complaint was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant in this action.

On March 30, 2012, an order was entered by the Court granting defendants' motions to dismiss and directing the clerk to enter a judgment dismissing the consolidated cases.

On January 14, 2013, the Lead Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: GENZ
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 #: 09-CV-11267
JUDGE: Hon. George A. OToole, Jr
DATE FILED: 07/29/2009
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/26/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/21/2009
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Gardy & Notis, LLP (NJ)
    440 Sylvan Avenue, Gardy & Notis, LLP (NJ), NJ 07632
    201-567-7377 201-567-7337 · info@gardylaw.com
  2. Gilman & Pastor LLP (Old Boston)
    225 Franklin Street, 16th Floor, Gilman & Pastor LLP (Old Boston), MA 02110
    1.888.211.6830 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 09-CV-11267
JUDGE: Hon. George A. OToole, Jr
DATE FILED: 02/27/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/24/2007
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/13/2009
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (Former New York)
    1285 Avenue of the Americas, 33rd Floor, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (Former New York), NY 10019
    212.554.1400 212.554.1444 · blbg@blbglaw.com
  2. Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington)
    1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2100, Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington), DE 19801
    302.622.7000 302.622.7100 · lawyers@gelaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date