On or around 01/15/2019 (Ongoing date of last review)
Filing Date: January 15, 2019
According to the Complaint, DBV Technologies S.A., a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, engages in the research and development of epicutaneous immunotherapy products. Its lead product candidate was Viaskin Peanut, an immunotherapy product, which completed Phase III clinical trial for the treatment of peanut allergies in children, adolescents, and adults.
The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) DBV Technologies’ Biologics License Application (“BLA”) for Viaskin Peanut failed to provide the FDA with sufficient data on manufacturing procedures and quality controls; (2) consequently, DBV Technologies voluntarily withdrew the BLA for Viaskin Peanut; and (3) as a result, Defendants’ statements about DBV Technologies’ business, operations, and prospects were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: DBV Technologies S.A.
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
Ticker Symbol: DBVT
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
Travis Ito-Stone, et al. v. DBV Technologies S.A., et al.
COURT: D. New Jersey
DOCKET #: 19-CV-00525
JUDGE: Hon. Madeline Cox Arleo
DATE FILED: 01/15/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/14/2018
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/19/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
The Rosen Law Firm (South Orange)
First Identified Complaint (FIC) Filings:
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
Related District Court Filings
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available