Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 06/23/2016 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: August 18, 2015

According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that Biogen and certain of its executive officers and directors misrepresented the financial benefits that Biogen would receive from the sale of its drug TECFIDERA. TECFIDERA is one of Biogen's most important drug products. On multiple occasions during the first half of 2015, the defendants predicted 2015 revenue growth between 14% and 16% over 2014. Specifically, the market was told that "TECFIDERA will represent the largest contributor to [Biogen's] overall revenue growth."

But then, on July 24, 2015, Biogen announced a revision to its previously issued revenue growth guidance, reducing its expected growth by half "based largely on revised expectations for the growth of TECFIDERA." On this news, the trading price of Biogen common stock dropped from a closing price of $385.05 on July 23, 2015 to close at $300.03 per share on July 24, 2015, a loss of more than 22%, on extremely heavy trading volume.

On June 23, 2016, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: BIIB
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: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 15-CV-13189
JUDGE: Hon. F. Dennis Saylor, IV
DATE FILED: 08/18/2015
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/29/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/23/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
    30 Broad Street, 15 1h Floor, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, NY 10004
    212.363.7500 212.363-7171 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 15-CV-13189
JUDGE: Hon. F. Dennis Saylor, IV
DATE FILED: 01/19/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/02/2014
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/23/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC (New York)
    60 East 42nd Street - Suite 4600, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC (New York), NY 10165
    212.697.6484 212.697.7296 · info@bgandg.com
  2. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
  3. Thorton Law Firm LLP
    100 Summer Street, 30th Floor, Thorton Law Firm LLP, MA 02110
    (617) 720-1333 (617) 720-2445 ·
No Document Title Filing Date