In Re Discovery Laboratories Securities Litigation

276 F. App'x 154
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedApril 29, 2008
Docket07-2080
StatusUnpublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 276 F. App'x 154 (In Re Discovery Laboratories Securities Litigation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Discovery Laboratories Securities Litigation, 276 F. App'x 154 (3d Cir. 2008).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

RENDELL, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiffs, the Mizla Group and Clame Spooner, appeal the dismissal of their Second Amended Complaint (“the Complaint”) in a securities class action. In the Complaint, they alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78¡j(b), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated under the Act, 17 CFR § 240.10b-5, by defendants, Discovery Laboratories, Inc. (“Discovery”), Robert Capetola, President and Chief Executive Officer of Discovery, and Christopher Schaber, former Chief Operating Officer of Discovery. The District Court considered the claims in the Complaint in a lengthy opinion and ultimately dismissed each claim for failure to sufficiently plead materiality and/or scienter under the heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. The plaintiffs appeal the dismissal of the majority of their claims, but have abandoned or waived others. 1

We find the District Court’s opinion well-reasoned and do not find that any of the issues before us constitutes grounds for disturbing or varying from its analysis. Accordingly, we will affirm the dismissal of the complaint for the reasons set forth therein.

1

. In particular, we note that appellants appeal the dismissal of their allegations relating to statements made regarding the likelihood of approval by the European Medicines Evaluation Agency only on the basis of materiality. The District Court, however, dismissed those allegations based on insufficient pleading of scienter as well, and appellants do not challenge that determination on appeal. Thus, a ruling in their favor on the materiality issue would be unavailing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
276 F. App'x 154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-discovery-laboratories-securities-litigation-ca3-2008.