Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 01/17/2014 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: January 31, 2011

According to a press release dated February 2, 2011, MannKind is a biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of therapeutic products for diseases, such as diabetes and cancer, including its lead product candidate, AFREZZA(R) (insulin human [rDNA origin]) Inhalation Powder ("AFREZZA") for the treatment of adult patients with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes.

The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and prospects for AFREZZA. Specifically, defendants continuously hyped AFREZZA for the treatment of adult patients with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes for the control of hyperglycemia, telling market observers that AFREZZA was one of the most valuable products in the history of drug making, while failing to disclose that MannKind's platform would require better information for patients about the risks of AFREZZA. As a result of defendants' false and misleading statements, MannKind's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

Then, on January 19, 2011, shortly before the market closed, MannKind issued a press release announcing that the Company had received a complete response letter from the FDA pertaining to the Company's New Drug Application for AFREZZA. The FDA deferred approving AFREZZA and requested two additional clinical trials with the inhaler. Prior to this news being released on January 19, 2011, MannKind's stock began dropping as news of the FDA deferral leaked into the market. The complaint alleges that, in fact, the FDA notice had been received on January 18, 2011, and defendants had held off informing shareholders. Trading was halted in MannKind stock on January 19, 2011, and when trading resumed the next day, MannKind's stock plunged $2.94 per share.

According to the Minutes entered on April 28, 2011, the Court appoints Choi as lead plaintiff and Pomerantz Haudek Gossman & Gross LLP and Glancy Binkow & Goldber LLP as co-lead counsel. The lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint on June 27, 2011, and corrected the complaint on June 28, 2011. On August 12, 2011, the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the case. The motion was denied on December 16, 2011.

On May 25, 2012, the Court issued an Order Granting Stipulation To Stay Action Post Mediation.

On August 6, 2012, a Stipulation of Settlement was entered into the Court's docket. On September 12, 2012, the Court issued an Order preliminarily approving the class action settlement.

On December 21, 2012, the Court issued an Order on the Motions for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, Award of Attorney Fees, and Reimbursement of Expenses. On the same date, the Court also issued an Order of Final Judgment and Dismissal.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: MNKD
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: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-00929
JUDGE: Hon. Gary A. Feess
DATE FILED: 01/31/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/25/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/19/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Dyer & Berens LLP
    303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 300, Dyer & Berens LLP, CO 80203
    303.861.1764 303.861.1764 ·
  2. Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC (Atlanta)
    200 Ashford Center North, Suite 300, Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC (Atlanta), GA 30338
    770.392.0090 770.392.0090 ·
  3. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: C.D. California
DOCKET #: 11-CV-00929
JUDGE: Hon. Gary A. Feess
DATE FILED: 06/28/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/04/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/11/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles)
    1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles), CA 90067
    310.201.915 310. 201-916 · info@glancylaw.com
  2. Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP (Chicago)
    10 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3505, Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP (Chicago), IL 60603
    312.377.1181 312.377.1181 ·
No Document Title Filing Date