Processing your request


please wait...

 | Case Page

 | Case Page |

Case Page

 

OvaScience, Inc.

Case Summary

OvaScience, Inc. Securities Litigation

Case Summary

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 05/18/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: March 24, 2017

According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges that defendants caused the Company to issue false and misleading statements and/or fail to disclose, among other things, that: (1) the science behind AUGMENT had not been scientifically validated; (2) the Company was unable to achieve the purported success rates it claimed; (3) the reasons why the Company moved its studies outside of the United States; and (4) that at all relevant times, the Company's profitability and prospects were false and misleading.

An amended Complaint was filed on August 25, 2017. On October 10, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended Complaint. On July 31, 2018, the Court issued an Order denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

On March 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Class Certification. On May 8, 2020, the Court issued an Order certifying a Class.

Company & Securities Information

Defendant: OvaScience, Inc.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: OVAS
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

Fadi Dahhan, et al. v. OvaScience, Inc., et al.

COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 17-CV-10511
JUDGE: Hon. Indira Talwani
DATE FILED: 03/24/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/08/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/26/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Lifshitz & Miller
  2. Matorin Law Office, LLC
First Identified Complaint (FIC) Filings:
No Document Title Filing Date
1 Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws 03/24/2017
2 Memorandum And Order 07/05/2017

Reference Complaint

Fadi Dahhan, et al. v. OvaScience, Inc., et al.

COURT: D. Massachusetts
DOCKET #: 17-CV-10511
JUDGE: Hon. Indira Talwani
DATE FILED: 08/25/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/17/2014
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/28/2015
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Criden & Love, P.A.
  2. Law Office Of Alan L. Kovacs
  3. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Boca Raton)
Reference Complaint (REF) Filings:
No Document Title Filing Date
1 Amended Class Action Complaint 08/25/2017
2 Memorandum & Order 07/16/2018
3 Memorandum & Order 07/16/2018
4 Memorandum & Order 07/31/2018
5 Order on Class Certification 05/08/2020
6 U.S. District Court Civil Docket 05/18/2020
7 Order on Class Certification, Appointment of Class Representative, and Appointment of Class Counsel 05/18/2020

Related District Court Filings

—Related District Court Filings Data is not available
 
 

Cases