On November 19, 2020, the Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow issued an Order granting Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in its entirety in Dougherty v. Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.
On July 30, 2020, the Hon. J. Paul Oetken, United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York, entered an Order preliminarily approving a $1,600,000 class action settlement in Intellipharmaceutics Securities Litigation
On August 17, 2020, the Hon. Kathleen Kay of the Western District of Louisiana approved the selection of KSF as Lead Counsel for the putative class in Welch v. Meaux, et al.
On July 27, 2020, the Hon. Lucy H. Koh of the Northern District of California approved the selection of KSF as Lead Counsel for the putative class in In Re Cloudera Securities Litigation.
On July 20, 2020, the Hon. Lucy H. Koh of the Northern District of California approved the selection of KSF as Lead Counsel for the putative class in Ikeda v. Baidu, Inc.
On July 13, 2020, a three-judge panel for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated in-part the dismissal order of Hon. William H. Pauley III, reviving investors’ Exchange Act claims against NewLink Genetics Corp.
On May 31, 2020 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.
On May 18, 2020, Hon. William J. Martini, United States District Judge for the District of New Jersey, entered an Order denying Defendants’ motion to dismiss against Honeywell, and individual defendants Darius Adamczyk, and Thomas A. Szlosek.
On April 30, 2020, the Hon. Nicholas G. Garaufis, United States District Court Judge for the Eastern District of New York, entered an Order denying, in part, defendants’ motion to dismiss in Oliver, et al. v. American Express Company, et al.
On April 8, 2020, KSF was 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.