On or around 12/04/2020 (Date of last review)
Filing Date: March 06, 2020
According to the Complaint, Tilray, Inc. engages in the research, cultivation, processing, and distribution of medical cannabis.
On January 15, 2019, Tilray issued a press release announcing entry into a marketing and revenue sharing agreement with Authentic Brands Group (“ABG”), “an owner of a portfolio of global lifestyle and entertainment brands” (the “ABG Agreement”).
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, the Complaint alleges Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the purported advantages of the ABG Agreement were significantly overstated; (ii) the underperformance of the ABG Agreement would foreseeably have a significant impact on the Company’s financial results; and (iii) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
This case was voluntarily dismissed on May 26, 2020. A related case continues under Docket 20-CV-03459 in the Southern District of New York.
On August 6, the Court issued an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended Complaint on October 5.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Tilray, Inc.
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
Ticker Symbol: TLRY
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.