Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/19/2011 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: August 07, 2009

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false and misleading press releases regarding the success of clinical trials for its drug Proellex. On August 3, 2009, Repros revealed that it was suspending Proellex clinical trials based in a clinically significant increase in liver enzymes among participants. On that day, Repros stock closed at $1.31, a 48% drop from a close of $2.53 the trading day before. This was a 73% drop from the close of $4.96 on July 1, 2009.

According to the Orders entered on October 23 and December 4, 2009, Judge Vanessa D Gilmore granted the motions to consolidate the cases under Civil Action No. H-09-2530. On January 27, 2010, the court-appointed lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint. On March 15, 2010, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint. On November 17, 2010, Magistrate Judge Mary Milloy recommended that the motion to dismiss be granted. On January 19, 2011, Judge Vanessa D. Gilmore adopted the recommendation, and the action was dismissed with prejudice. Final Judgment was entered, and the case is now terminated.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: RPRX
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: S.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 09-CV-02530
JUDGE: Hon. Vanessa D Gilmore
DATE FILED: 08/07/2009
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/01/2009
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/03/2009
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Emerson Poynter LLP (Houston)
    830 Apollo Lane, Emerson Poynter LLP (Houston), TX 77058
    281.488.8854 281.488.8854 ·
  2. Emerson Poynter LLP (Little Rock)
    500 President Clinton Ave., Suite 305, Emerson Poynter LLP (Little Rock), AR 72201
    501.907.2555 501.907.2555 ·
  3. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 09-CV-02530
JUDGE: Hon. Vanessa D Gilmore
DATE FILED: 01/27/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/01/2009
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/02/2009
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
No Document Title Filing Date