BALA CYNWYD, Pa., Sept. 26, 2001 (PRIMEZONE) -- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP announced today that it recently filed lawsuits on behalf of shareholders of Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., ConAgra Foods, Inc., Rambus, Inc. and Clarent Corp. for violations of the federal securities laws.
If you purchased the securities of any of the companies listed below during the respective class periods, you may be a member of the class and have until the date specified to move the court to become the lead plaintiff. For more information on a particular lawsuit and to view the complaint, you may visit our Website at www.sbclasslaw.com. To learn more about your rights and interests in these cases and your ability to potentially recoup your losses, please contact Schiffrin & Barroway directly at (888) 299-7706 (toll free) or (610) 667-7706, fax number (610) 667-7056, or by e-mail at info@sbclasslaw.com.
AMYLIN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. (Nasdaq:AMLN) (Class Period: 03/31/98 - 07/25/01). Amylin is engaged in the discovery, development and commercialization of potential drug candidates for the treatment of metabolic disorders. On July 25, 2001, the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") released medical and statistical reviews regarding Amylin's diabetes drug pramlintide acetate (SYMLIN) prior to an FDA Advisory Committee Meeting scheduled for July 26, 2001. This review cited major concerns regarding the safety and lack of efficacy of SYMLIN. The review stated there were major adverse events upon treatment with SYMLIN and an alarming number of patients that had life altering events relating to hypoglycemia (low blood glucose level), including major trauma, accidents and death, many of which apparently were concealed from the safety database, making this database unreliable to the FDA. The complaint alleges that this hypoglycemic side effect was particularly surprising to the FDA and investors, as the Company all along had claimed that one advantage of SYMLIN over insulin was that it did not increase the risk of hypoglycemia. From an efficacy standpoint, the medical review stated that the clinical trials deviated from good medical practice because during the studies a constant insulin dose was maintained in the patient, and therefore, the data provided little insight to which patients, if any, would benefit from SYMLIN or how it should be used. The public announcements made during the Class Period were materially false and misleading when issued in that they falsely portrayed Amylin as a growing, successful, well-managed, law-abiding, well-controlled company, and a leader of its industry, and that it had a highly effective drug, SYMLIN. These public announcements and statements did not make full, complete and timely disclosure of Amylin's fraudulent illegal practices and failed to correct false and misleading statements made prior to July 25, 2001 in that they failed to disclose the following material adverse information: (a) Amylin had been concealing materially negative information from the FDA which would render FDA approval of SYMLIN impossible; (b) the actual study showed that SYMLIN was causing a four-fold increase in hypoglycemia-related events in patients as compared to a placebo; (c) in Type 1 diabetics, SYMLIN was reducing the patients' ability to recognize hypoglycemia; (d) contrary to the Company's repeated statements that SYMLIN had no additional risk for hypoglycemia, SYMLIN was showing that it did create additional risk; (e) the treatment and control arms of the SYMLIN study were manipulated in order to create the appearance of SYMLIN's efficacy, and SYMLIN's purported efficacy was not based on a full battery of applicable statistical analyses/tests, including factoring in the variances in doses; and (f) the results of the SYMLIN study actually favored treatment with insulin alone. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The lead plaintiff motion must be filed no later than October 8, 2001.
CONAGRA FOODS, INC. (NYSE:CAG) (Class Period: 08/28/98 - 05/23/01). The complaint charges ConAgra and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial business. Specifically, the complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants issued press releases reporting ConAgra's quarterly and year-end financial performance, and filed reports confirming such performance with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). These statements, as alleged in the complaint, were materially false and misleading because United Agri Products, a ConAgra subsidiary, engaged in improper accounting throughout the Class Period, including improperly recognizing revenue and insufficiently reserving for bad debt. On May 23, 2001 ConAgra issued a press release announcing that the Company will restate its financial results for the fiscal years 1998, 1999 and 2000. The press release revealed that ConAgra will restate revenues for the Company's fiscal years 1998-2000, inclusive, which will be reduced by an estimated total of $349 million. The press release further revealed that the Company estimated that, upon restatement, earnings per share will be reduced from $1.35 to $1.32 for 1998, from $1.46 to $1.41 for 1999, and from $1.67 to $1.60 for 2000. Furthermore, according to the press release, the Company is cooperating with an ongoing investigation by the SEC into the matter. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. The lead plaintiff motion must be filed no later than October 9, 2001.
RAMBUS, INC. (Nasdaq:RMBS) (Class Period: 01/18/00 - 05/09/01). The complaint charges Rambus and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning, among other things: (i) the undisclosed fact that Rambus had engaged in fraudulent activity in order to obtain purportedly valuable patents on SDRAM computer memory and memory related technologies which enable semiconductor memory devices to keep pace with faster generations of processors and controllers; (ii) the true enforceability and viability of Rambus' SDRAM patents and the true risks involved with investing in Rambus stock during the Class Period; (iii) the effects these adverse undisclosed actions were having and would continue to have on the company's growth and earnings prospects; and (iv) that company insiders, certain of which are named as defendants in the action, sold or otherwise disposed of over $125 million of their privately held Rambus stock while in possession of undisclosed material adverse information regarding the true validity of the company's SDRAM patents, including the undisclosed fact that such patents were obtained by defendants' fraud. It was only after defendants sold or otherwise disposed of their privately held stock that, on May 9, 2001, investors learned the truth about Rambus, when a jury in a patent infringement suit filed by Rambus against one of its competitors, Infineon Technologies, AG, determined that Rambus' SDRAM patents had been obtained by fraud. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lead plaintiff motion must be filed no later than October 9, 2001.
CLARENT CORP. (Nasdaq:CLRN) (Class Period: 04/20/01 - 08/31/01). The complaint charges Clarent and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. Specifically, the complaint alleges that on September 4, 2001, Clarent announced in a press release that it had discovered information suggesting that its previously reported revenues for the first and second quarters of fiscal 2001 may have been materially overstated, and that the Company's Board of Directors was forming a special committee to investigate a number of transactions that placed in question the Company's historical financial results. The Company also stated that its first quarter 2001 revenues, as released on April 19, 2001, and its second quarter 2001 revenues, as released on July 19, 2001, will be reduced and the related net losses will increase upon conclusion of the review. In addition, the Company anticipates that its revenues for the second half of fiscal 2001 and for fiscal 2002 will be substantially below previously anticipated levels, and that the related losses will be significantly larger than expected. The Company also announced that several of its officers had been placed on administrative leave. On this news, trading halted at $5.37. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lead plaintiff motion must be filed no later than November 4, 2001.
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP has prosecuted shareholder class actions for more than 14 years and has recovered more than $1 billion for investors. If you are a shareholder in any of the companies listed above and would like to be a lead plaintiff in one of these securities class actions, please contact Schiffrin & Barroway at (888) 299-7706.
More information on this and other class actions can be found on the Class Action Newsline at www.primezone.com/ca