As I noted in posts earlier this month (here and here), even though the COVID pandemic is about to enter its fourth year, COVID-related securities suits continue to be filed. The latest example is the securities class action lawsuit complaint filed late last week against pharmaceutical delivery device firm Catalent, a firm whose revenues soared at the in the early stages of the pandemic but whose fortunes lagged as the pandemic progressed. A copy of the February 24, 2023 complaint against the company can be found here.
Continue Reading Pharmaceutical Delivery Device Firm Hit with COVID-Related Securities Suit
Since the initial coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. in March 2020, plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed a host of securities class action lawsuits against companies raising a variety of COVID-19-related allegations. Many of these cases have faced significant hurdles at the initial pleading stage, and in a number of cases the dismissal motions have been granted. The one categorical exception to these dismissal motion generalizations seems to be cases involving vaccine development companies. Two rulings in the past week seem to corroborate both of these observations. First, in a December 9, 2022 ruling in the securities suit pending against the diagnostic testing company Talis Biomedical, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss (albeit with leave to amend). However, in a December 12, 2022 ruling in the securities case against the vaccine development company Novavax, the court denied the defendants’ dismissal motion in significant part. The rulings in these two cases are discussed below.
At this point late in the year, it is looking increasingly likely that 2022 will be a down year in terms of the number of securities class action lawsuit filings relative both to recent years and even relative to long term historical norms. However, an important (and arguably somewhat surprising) part of the securities suits that were filed this year is the significant number of COVID-related securities suits filed this year. I say “surprising” because it seems unexpected well into the third year that plaintiffs’ lawyers would be continuing to file these suits. In the latest example of these kinds of suits, earlier this week a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against the pharmaceutical company Veru, Inc. related to the company’s disclosures concerning its efforts to develop a COVID-related therapy drug. A copy of the December 5, 2022 complaint filed against Veru can be found 
Regular readers know that in recent months I have been following two securities class action litigation filing trends: first, the incidence of COVID-19-related securities suit filings, and, second, the influx of claims relating to macroeconomic factors, including, among other things, global supply chain disruption (which was itself caused at least in part by the coronavirus). In a lawsuit that includes allegations that involve both of these trends, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a securities class action lawsuit against the women’s online apparel company, Torrid Holdings, Inc. As discussed below, the complaint alleges, among other things, that in connection with the company’s July 2021 IPO, the company soft-pedaled the impact on the company from COVID-19 and from supply chain disruptions. A copy of the plaintiff’s November 16, 2022 complaint can be found 
As I have noted previously (most recently 
One litigation trend that I have been following on this site since the initial coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. in March 2020 is the incidence of COVID-19-related securities class action litigation. Even though the outbreak is now well into its third year, these coronavirus-related cases continue to be filed. In the latest example of this phenomenon, on November 8, 2022, a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against Eiger Biopharmaceuticals in connection with the company’s efforts to develop a COVID-19 treatment. A copy of the plaintiff’s complaint in the case can be found 
As I have noted in numerous posts on this site, since the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in March 2020, plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed a host of coronavirus-related securities class action lawsuits. As I also noted, the plaintiffs’ track record in these cases has been mixed at best, with a number of the cases being dismissed. In the latest example of the hurdles the plaintiffs are facing in these cases, a federal court has entered an order dismissing the COVID-19 related securities suit that was filed against the pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca relating to the company’s troubled efforts to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. A copy of the September 12, 2022 opinion in the case can be found 
Just as the COVID-19 virus continues to represent a threat to human populations, companies continue to explore possible alternatives for the treatment of the disease and its symptoms. As in any initiative built around developing and testing unproven products or processes, a number of these efforts to develop coronavirus treatments and therapies are unsuccessful. In some instances, litigation ensues after these unsuccessful efforts. A lawsuit filed last week against a biopharmaceutical company exemplifies the way this sequence of events can lead to litigation, in turn sustaining the ongoing phenomenon of coronavirus-related securities litigation filings that began at the time of the initial COVID-19 outbreak in the U.S. in March 2020.
The COVID-19-related securities litigation wave has now been around long enough that companies that were sued early on in the pandemic are now being sued again based on more recent developments. Co-Diagnostics, a diagnostic testing company that was sued in the early months of the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. in 2020, has now been sued again in a separate securities class action lawsuit based on the company’s disclosures surrounding its release of its second quarter 2022 financial results. A copy of the new complaint against Co-Diagnostics can be found