Processing your request

please wait...

Case Page


Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/15/2016 (Other)

Filing Date: August 12, 2016

According to a law firm's press release, the Complaint alleges that Relypsa’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) forced through a sale of the Company in order to reap personal benefits they negotiated with Galenica AG, and Vifor Pharma USA Inc. (collectively, the “Buyer”) to the detriment of Relypsa’s public stockholders. According to the Complaint, the Board pushed through a merger pursuant to which the Buyer plans to acquire 100% of the outstanding shares of Relypsa common stock through an all-cash tender offer (the “Tender Offer”) followed by a second-step merger (the “Proposed Transaction”). Further, the Buyer has offered Relypsa investors $32.00 per share in cash, or a total of approximately $1.53 billion (the “Offer Price” or “Merger Consideration”). The Complaint also alleges that the Proposed Transaction undervalues Relypsa’s prospects and is the result of an unfair, truncated and conflicted sale process. Indeed, even after the transaction was announced both Wedbush and Guggenheim put price targets on the Company of $51.00 and $49.00 per share respectively, well above the inadequate $32.00 Offer Price.

This case was voluntarily dismissed on September 12, 2016.


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


Ticker Symbol: RLYP
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: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 16-CV-04605
JUDGE: Hon. William H. Orrick
DATE FILED: 08/12/2016
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/12/2016
  1. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (Los Angeles)
  2. Monteverde & Associates PC
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available