On or around 10/26/2018 (Ongoing date of last review)
Filing Date: November 10, 2016
According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges Defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Impax was engaging and/or had engaged in conduct that would cause the antitrust division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Connecticut Attorney General to conduct extensive investigations of possible collusion of generic drug pricing; (2) the DOJ investigation and the underlying conduct was likely to result in criminal charges against Impax, and possibly its officers and directors, for collusion of generic drug pricing; (3) Impax lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting; and (4) as a result, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
On February 15, 2017, the Court appointed Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on April 17. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint on June 1. On September 7, 2018, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Lead Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended Complaint. On October 26, Lead Plaintiff filed a second amended Complaint.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Impax Laboratories Inc.
Industry: Major Drugs
Headquarters: United States
Ticker Symbol: IPXL
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.
First Identified Complaint
Ted Nunez, Jr., et al. v. Impax Laboratories Inc., et al.