BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. Class Action Lawsuit - BMRN
- Company Name
- BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.
- Stock Symbol
- Class Period
- January 13, 2020 to September 3, 2021
- Motion Deadline
- December 21, 2021
- Northern District of California
The BioMarin class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers of BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (NASDAQ: BMRN) securities between January 13, 2020 and September 3, 2021, inclusive (the “Class Period”) and charges BioMarin as well as certain of its top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The BioMarin class action lawsuit was commenced on October 22, 2021 in the Northern District of California and is captioned Berlinger v. BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., No. 21-cv-08254.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the BioMarin class action lawsuit, please provide your information by clicking here. You can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at email@example.com. Lead plaintiff motions for the BioMarin class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than December 21, 2021.
CASE ALLEGATIONS: BioMarin is developing, among other product candidates, BMN 307, an AAV5 mediated gene therapy which is in a phase 1/2 clinical trial to normalize blood phenylalanine (“Phe”) concentration levels in patients with phenylketonuria (“PKU”). BioMarin’s Phearless Phase 1/2 study is evaluating BMN 307 in adults with PKU. On November 7, 2018, BioMarin shared pre-clinical data of BMN 307, which demonstrated lifetime Phe corrections in mouse models, and announced that BioMarin was planning to file an investigational new drug application (“IND”) for BMN 307 with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in the second half of 2019.
The BioMarin class action lawsuit alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose that: (i) BMN 307 was less safe than BioMarin had led investors to believe; (ii) BMN 307’s safety profile made it likely that the FDA would place a clinical hold on the Phearless Phase 1/2 study; (iii) accordingly, BioMarin had overstated BMN 307’s clinical and commercial prospects; and (iv) as a result, BioMarin’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On September 5, 2021, BioMarin issued a press release announcing “that the [FDA] placed a clinical hold on the BMN 307 Phearless Phase 1/2 study,” which “is evaluating BMN 307, an investigational AAV5-phenylalanine hydroxylase (PAH) gene therapy, in adults with [PKU].” BioMarin advised investors that “[t]he FDA’s clinical hold was based on interim safety findings from a pre-clinical, non-GLP pharmacology study.” On this news, BioMarin’s stock price fell by more than 8%, damaging investors.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased BioMarin securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the BioMarin class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the BioMarin class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the BioMarin class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery of the BioMarin class action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.
ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP: With 200 lawyers in 9 offices nationwide, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is the largest U.S. law firm representing investors in securities class actions. Robbins Geller attorneys have obtained many of the largest shareholder recoveries in history, including the largest securities class action recovery ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. The 2020 ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report ranked Robbins Geller first for recovering $1.6 billion for investors last year, more than double the amount recovered by any other securities plaintiffs’ firm.