Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action Lawsuit

Class Action News

Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against Human Genome Sciences, Inc., certain of the Company's senior officers and directors and GlaxoSmithKline plc in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock of HGSI between July 20, 2009 and November 11, 2010, inclusive (the "Class Period"), including all persons who acquired the common stock of HGSI in the Company's July 28, 2009 public offering at $14 per share and in its December 2, 2009 public offering of common stock at $26.75.

If you purchased the common stock of HGSI during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. Any member of the investor class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Scott+Scott (scottlaw@scott-scott.com), (800) 404-7770, (860) 537-5537 or visit the Scott+Scott HGSI Pharmaceutical website for more information: www.scott-scott.com/cases/hgs.html. There is no cost or fee to you.

The complaint filed in the action alleges that, during the Class Period, HGSI issued false and misleading statements concerning Benlysta(R), the Company's potential new drug for the treatment of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, a chronic, life-threatening autoimmune disease. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose that Benlysta was associated with suicide in clinical drug trials conducted by the Company.

The complaint alleges that when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration posted its analysis of Benlysta on the Internet on November 12, 2010, investors learned for the first time of the association between Benlysta and suicide in clinical trials of the drug, causing HGSI's common stock price to decline precipitously. Meanwhile, the complaint alleges, during the Class Period, HGSI sold to investors more than 44 million shares of its common stock in public offerings at artificially inflated prices, receiving $850 million in net proceeds.

Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major securities, antitrust and employee retirement plan actions throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds, foundations, individuals and other entities worldwide.

Related listings

  • SearchMedia Announces Settlement on Securities Class Action

    SearchMedia Announces Settlement on Securities Class Action

    Class Action News 11/11/2011

    SearchMedia Holdings Limited, one of China's leading nationwide multi-platform media companies, today announced that it reached a tentative partial settlement agreement for a securities class action lawsuit pending against the Company and a number of...

  • Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action

    Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action

    Class Action News 11/10/2011

    Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Diamond Foods, Inc. and certain of its officers. The class action (CV 11 5399 RS) filed in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, is on beh...

  • Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit

    Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit

    Class Action News 11/07/2011

    The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northe...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read