According to the law firm press release, Northwest Biotherapeutics, a development stage biotechnology company, discovers and develops immunotherapy products to treat cancers in the United States and internationally.
The Company is involved in the development of DCVax, a platform technology that uses activated dendritic cells to mobilize a patient’s own immune system to attack cancer. The Company’s products include DCVax-L, a brain and ovarian cancer treatment currently undergoing a Phase III trial in Germany (the “DCVax-L Trial”); DCVax-Direct, a treatment for various types of inoperable solid tumor cancers currently undergoing Phase I/II clinical trial (the “DCVax-Direct Trial”); and DCVax-Prostate, a treatment for late-stage hormone-independent prostate cancer.
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company’s claims regarding positive results from its DCVax-Direct Trial were based on preliminary and unconfirmed trial results; (ii) the DCVax-Direct Trial results on which the Company reported had not been reviewed or analyzed by the hospitals conducting the trials; (iii) the Company’s statements about DCVax-Direct were derived from patient case report forms, which the hospitals were obliged to send to the Company only because it sponsored the study; (iv) the Company was the subject of an aggressive stock promotion campaign which included promoters using fictitious identities and false credentials; (v) German regulators required additional information from the Company in order for the Company’s DCVax-L Trial to continue uninterrupted; and (vi) as a result of the above, the Company’s financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on February 12, 2016.
On March 31, 2017, the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss with leave to amend. Plaintiffs declined to file an amended complaint, and thus this case was closed.