Metabolix, Inc. is an American bioscience company that provides sustainable solutions to the plastic, chemical and energy industries.

According to a press release dated February 17, 2012, the Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the Company, and certain controlling individuals of the Company, made fraudulent material misrepresentations and omissions regarding the Company’s business and operations. Among other things, the Complaint alleges that Defendants materially misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that a joint venture would not meet its commercial phase benchmark as early as mid-2010, or even in 2011, which would allow the Company to receive royalty payments and payments from services from the joint venture; (ii) that one of the Company’s products was not commercially viable that would offer value to the Company and its shareholders; and (iii) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.

On January 12, 2012, the Company issued a press release announcing that its Partner had given notice of termination of the joint venture. The Partner disclosed it terminated the joint venture because uncertainty about projected capital and production costs, combined with the rate of market adoption, led to projected financial returns for the Partner that were too uncertain. On the same day, the Partner further disclosed that the joint venture was not delivering sufficient results now and was not expected to deliver sufficient results in a reasonable timeframe. Upon this news, the Company’s shares declined approximately 57%, to reach a multi-year low of $2.54.

On July 31, 2012, the Court issued an order appointing co-lead Plaintiffs and approving the selection of co-lead Counsel.

On August 14, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting a Motion for Reconsideration. The Court vacated the above July 31 Order and appointed new lead Plaintiff and lead Counsel.

On October 15, 2012, the Plaintiffs filed their amended Complaint.

On September 20, 2013, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order granting the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.