Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 08/28/2017 (Other)

Filing Date: March 31, 2017

According to the Complaint, on May 18, 2015, Endo announced that it would be expanding its Generic division with the acquisition of Par Pharmaceuticals ("Par"), a pharmaceutical company with a large portfolio of generic drugs. In order to finance part of the $8.05 billion acquisition price, the Company announced that it would be conducting a secondary public offering. On June 2, 2015, the Company announced an underwritten public offering of $1.75 billion of ordinary shares, later increased to $2 billion, to finance the acquisition (the "Offering").

On June 4, 2015, the Company issued a Prospectus Supplement in connection with the offering and announced the offering price of $83.25 per share. The Prospectus Supplement updated and formed part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File. No. 333-204657) and Prospectus issued by the Company on June 2, 2015 (collectively, with the Prospectus Supplement, the "Registration Statement").

The Complaint alleges Plaintiff and the Class were unaware that the Registration Statement contained untrue statements of then-present material fact and failed to disclose material information and negative trends about Endo's Generic division required by SEC regulations.

On August 28, 2017, the Court issued an Order remanding this case to the Chester County Common Pleas Court.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Major Drugs
Headquarters: Ireland

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ENDP
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: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 17-CV-01466
JUDGE: Hon.PAUL S. DIAMOND
DATE FILED: 03/31/2017
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/05/2015
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/31/2017
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Goldman Scarlato & Penny PC
    161 Washington St Suite 1025, Goldman Scarlato & Penny PC, PA 19428
    484-342-0700 ·
  2. Labaton Sucharow LLP
    140 Broadway, Labaton Sucharow LLP, NY 10005
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@labaton.com
No Document Title Filing Date