News, Updates, & Insights

The Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow issued an Order granting Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in its entirety in Dougherty v. Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.

The Honorable R. Steven Whalen certified a class of shareholders in Dougherty v. Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. et al, No. 2:16-cv-10089, a securities fraud class action involving Defendants’ materially misleading statements and omissions concerning a cardiovascular outcomes trial for the Company’s lead drug candidate.

KSF approved as Co-Lead Counsel for the Class in Bellingham v. Qudian Inc. et al. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and failed to disclose material information regarding the negative effect developments in China’s regulatory environment had on Qudian’s business and operations.

The Hon. Patricia Koch, District Judge appointed KSF as co-lead counsel for the class in Helen Moore, et al v. Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets, et al¸ No. 251,417.  The class alleges that Defendants breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the sale of Cleco to an investment consortium by, inter alia.

The Hon. Travis J. Laster of the Delaware Chancery Court appointed KSF as co-lead counsel for the class in Kenneth Riche, et al v. James C. Pappas, et al. The class alleges that Defendants breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the acquisition of U.S. Geothermal by Ormat Technologies, Inc. by, inter alia.

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California entered an order denying in large part defendants’ motion to dismiss. The Hon. Janis L. Sammartino found that Lead Plaintiff’s allegations gave rise to a strong inference of scienter with respect to materially misleading statements and omissions. This successful result was obtained after KSF prevailed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and in the United States Supreme Court.

The Hon. Elizabeth A. Kovachevich denied Defendant Health Insurance Innovations’ motion to dismiss, in part. Judge Kovachevich found Lead Plaintiff’s allegations that the company’s 2017 10-Q Second Quarter Report was misleading because it (i) conveyed the false impression that HII would not need a third party administrator (“TPA”) license to conduct its third-party insurance business in its home state of Florida and, (ii) misrepresented the reasons that the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation denied its application for a TPA license well plead.