On or around 01/23/2020 (Date of last review)
Filing Date: March 06, 2019
According to the Complaint, Inogen is a medical technology company.
The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants made false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose adverse information regarding Inogen’s business metrics and financial prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants failed to disclose that: (i) Inogen had overstated the true size of the total addressable market (“TAM”) for its portable oxygen concentrators and had misstated the basis for its calculation of the TAM; (ii) Inogen had falsely attributed its sales growth to the strong sales acumen of its salesforce, when in reality it was due in large part to sales tactics designed to deceive its elderly customer base; (iii) the growth in Inogen’s domestic business-to-business sales to home medical equipment (“HME”) providers was inflated, unsustainable and was eroding direct-to-consumer sales; and (iv) very little of Inogen’s business was actually coming from the more stable Medicare market.
On May 20, 2019, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases and appointing Lead Plaintiffs and Counsel. Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended Complaint on July 10. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the consolidated amended Complaint on September 23. On November 5, the Court issued an Order denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Defendants filed another Motion to Dismiss the case on November 12. On January 2, 2020, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs were given leave to amend the Complaint.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Inogen, Inc.
Industry: Medical Equipment & Supplies
Headquarters: United States
Ticker Symbol: INGN
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.