Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 10/06/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: February 06, 2017

According to the law firm press release, Aratana Therapeutics, Inc. is a development-stage biopharmaceutical company that develops biomedical therapeutics for animals. The Company offers various products to treat pain and inflammation associated with serious medical conditions in pets. One of the Company’s key products is ENTYCE, also known as AT-002 (capromorelin oral solution), an appetite stimulant for dogs.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Aratana did not have manufacturing contracts in place sufficient to support manufacturing of ENTYCE at a commercial scale; (ii) consequently, ENTYCE was not likely to be commercially available until late 2017; (iii) accordingly, Aratana had misled investors with respect to the likely timeline for a commercial launch of ENTYCE; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, Aratana’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

An amended complaint was filed on August 7, 2017.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PETX
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 17-CV-00880
JUDGE: Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer
DATE FILED: 02/06/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/16/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/03/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 17-CV-00880
JUDGE: Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer
DATE FILED: 08/07/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/16/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/13/2017
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