On or around 08/06/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)
Filing Date: November 04, 2016
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges throughout the Class Period Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Allergan and Actavis were engaging and/or had engaged in conduct that would result in an antitrust investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice; (2) the DOJ investigation and the underlying conduct could cause U.S. prosecutors to file criminal charges against Allergan and Actavis by the end of 2016 for suspected price collusion; (3) in turn, Allergan and Actavis lacked effective internal controls; and (4) as a result, Allergan plc’s and Actavis plc’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
The first filed action was voluntarily dismissed on January 2, 2017. However, this action continues under a related filing, in the District of New Jersey, Forden v. Allergan PLC, et al., No. 16-cv-9499. On May 1, Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended Complaint. On November 28, Plaintiffs filed a consolidated second amended Complaint. On January 22, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the consolidated second amended Complaint. The Court issued an Order on August 6, 2019, denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Allergan plc
Industry: Major Drugs
Ticker Symbol: AGN
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.