Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 11/06/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: October 22, 2015

According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period, Defendants issued materially false and misleading statements to investors and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Valeant had deficient internal controls, (2) Valeant had a relationship with a network of specialty pharmacies used to boost Valeant’s sales of its high-priced drugs; (3) the use of specialty pharmacies left Valeant vulnerable to increased regulatory risks, (4) Defendants were under government scrutiny for its financial assistance programs for patients, pricing decisions and the distribution of its products, (5) Valeant faced the risk of scrutiny over its price increases, (6) without using specialty pharmacies, Valeant’s financial performance would be negatively impacted, (7) without using specialty pharmacies, Valeant’s Class Period performance would have been negatively impacted, (8) Valeant’s true relationship with Philidor and the extent of that relationship, (9) Valeant controlled Philidor, (10) Valeant’s subsidiary KGA had a secured lien interest on Philidor’s ownership, (11) Defendants were engaged in a scheme to manipulate Valeant’s stock price, and (12) as a result, Valeant’s public statements were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on June 24, 2016.

On April 28, 2017, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motions to Dismiss.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Major Drugs
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: VRX
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: D. New Jersey
DOCKET #: 15-CV-07658
JUDGE: Hon. Michael A. Shipp
DATE FILED: 10/22/2015
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/23/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/20/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Cohn, Lifland, Pearlman, Herrmann & Knopf
    Park 80 Plaza West-One, Cohn, Lifland, Pearlman, Herrmann & Knopf, NJ 7663
    201845.9600 · info@njlawfirm.com
  2. Johnson & Weaver, LLP
    110 West “A” Street, Suite 750, Johnson & Weaver, LLP, CA 92101
    619.230.0063 619.230.0063 · contactus@johnsonandweaver.com
  3. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Boca Raton)
    120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33432
    561.750.3000 561.750.3364 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. New Jersey
DOCKET #: 15-CV-07658
JUDGE: Hon. Michael A. Shipp
DATE FILED: 06/24/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/04/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/15/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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 ·
  2. Trief & Olk
    9 Kansas Street, Trief & Olk, NJ 07601
    201/343-5770 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date