Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 02/21/2014 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: September 18, 2013

According to the law firm press release, Edwards Lifesciences is a medical device maker that designs and markets, among other things, artificial heart valves for implantation in patients with advanced cardiovascular disease. The Company offers a range of such valves, including both valves that require traditional open-chest surgery, and its newer SAPIEN line of transcatheter heart valves (“THVs”), which may be implanted using a minimally invasive procedure.

The Complaint alleges that the Company issued false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material facts related to the prospects, projected sales and adoption of the Company’s Edwards SAPIEN transcatheter aortic heart valve, including the related transfemoral and transapical delivery methods (“SAPIEN”), and related projections of financial performance for the Company’s operations. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants knew but concealed from Edwards Lifesciences’ shareholders during the Class Period that: (1) adoption of SAPIEN was weaker than the Company claimed, due to concerns among physicians over the risks and complexity of the procedure for implanting the valve; (2) Edwards Lifesciences’ outlook for sales and earnings per share (“EPS”) was significantly weaker than the optimistic guidance defendants offered to investors; and (3) as a result, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for the statements made concerning the Company’s operations, forecasts and outlook.

On April 23, 2013, the Company disclosed that approximately 20 candidate hospitals had postponed SAPIEN training, that there was substantially no backlog of patients awaiting SAPIEN implants, and that the Company’s financial results had been and would likely continue to be weaker than estimates. In response to this news, Edwards Lifesciences’ stock price fell $18.21 per share, or 21.99 percent, to close at $64.60 per share on April 24, 2013 on extremely heavy trading volume.

On February 21, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed a Notice voluntarily dismissing this case.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector:
Industry:
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: EW
Company Market: New York SE
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 #: 13-CV-01463
JUDGE: Hon. Josephine Staton Tucker
DATE FILED: 09/18/2013
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/25/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/23/2013
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. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
No Document Title Filing Date