Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 07/17/2017 (Notice of voluntarily dismissal)

Filing Date: February 13, 2017

According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges that, among other allegations, throughout the Class Period, Anthera made materially false and/or misleading statements concerning the potential efficacy and success of its Solution Study and CHABLIS-SC1 clinical trials, as the Company failed to disclose that: (i) patients were not improving in the CHABLIS-SC1 clinical trial; and (ii) there were dosing problems inherent in the Solution Study design that created challenges to obtaining responses.

On November 10, 2016, the Company issued a press release announcing that the CHABLIS-SC1 clinical trial with blisibimod for the treatment of SLE failed to meet its primary endpoint. Following this news, shares of Anthera fell approximately 32% to close at $1.90 on November 10, 2016. Then on December 27, 2016, the Company issued another press release, announcing that the Solution clinical study in cystic fibrosis patients with EPI missed the CFA non-inferiority margin of the primary modified Intent to Treat. Following this news, shares of Anthera fell approximately 63% to close at $0.74 on December 28, 2016.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ANTH
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 #: 17-CV-00715
JUDGE: Hon. Richard Seeborg
DATE FILED: 02/13/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/10/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/27/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford)
    733 Summer Street, Suite 304, Levi & Korsinsky (Stamford), CT 06901
    203-992-4523 ·
No Document Title Filing Date