Instadose Pharma Corp. Class Action Lawsuit - INSD; MZKR

Company Name
Instadose Pharma Corp.
Stock Symbol
Class Period
December 8, 2020 to November 24, 2021
Motion Deadline
February 28, 2022
Eastern District of Virginia
38 days left to seek lead plaintiff status

Case Summary

The Instadose class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers of Instadose Pharma Corp. f/k/a Mikrocoze, Inc. (OTC: INSD; MZKR) securities between December 8, 2020 and November 24, 2021, inclusive (the “Class Period”).  Commenced on December 30, 2021 in the Eastern District of Virginia, the Instadose class action lawsuit – captioned DeLuca v. Instadose Pharma Corp. f/k/a Mikrocoze, Inc., No. 21-cv-00675– charges Instadose and its top executive with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Instadose 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 jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com.  Lead plaintiff motions for the Instadose class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than February 28, 2022.

CASE ALLEGATIONS: Instadose was formerly known as “Mikrocoze, Inc.”, which was organized to sell micro-furniture for small spaces via the Internet.  Instadose has since pivoted its business to focus on growth and acquisition of pharmaceutical grade agricultural products.  On December 7, 2020, Instadose (then still known as Mikrocoze) entered into a non-binding letter of intent with Instadose Pharma Corp., a Canadian-based cannabis producer (“Instadose Canada”), and holders of a majority of its outstanding shares for a transaction to acquire 100% of the outstanding common shares of Instadose Canada in exchange for approximately 80% of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of Instadose following such exchange.

The Instadose class action lawsuit alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose that: (i) Instadose had performed inadequate due diligence into the business combination and/or ignored significant red flags associated with Instadose Canada; (ii) Instadose’s internal controls and policies were inadequate to detect and/or prevent impermissible trading activity by control persons of Instadose; (iii) the foregoing subjected Instadose to a heightened risk of regulatory scrutiny and enforcement action; and (iv) as a result, Instadose’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On July 9, 2021, the Ontario Securities Commission (“OSC”) announced that the Chairman and CEO of Instadose Canada, Grant Ferdinand Sanders, was charged quasi-criminally with one count of fraud in relation to his role as Chairman and CEO of Instadose Canada, which, since July 2017, had raised more than $9.4 million from investors.  The OSC alleged that investor funds were diverted to the benefit of Sanders, his family, and associates, and that Instadose Canada materially misrepresented the nature of its business.

Then, on November 24, 2021, in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Instadose disclosed that “[o]n November 23, 2021, the Company was notified by the SEC that it had ordered . . . that trading in the securities of [Instadose be] suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on November 24, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on December 8, 2021.”  Instadose advised investors that the SEC’s order specifically stated that “it appears to the [SEC] that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension in the trading of the securities of Instadose . . . because of questions and concerns regarding the adequacy and accuracy of information about Instadose . . . in the marketplace, including: (1) significant increases in the stock price and share volume unsupported by the company’s assets and financial information; (2) trading that may be associated with individuals related to a control person of Instadose . . .; and (3) the operations of Instadose[]’s Canadian affiliate.”  On this news, and after Instadose’s common stock began publicly trading again on December 9, 2021, Instadose’s stock price fell by nearly 92%, damaging investors.

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Instadose securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Instadose 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 Instadose class action lawsuit.  The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Instadose class action lawsuit.  An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery of the Instadose 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 that year, more than double the amount recovered by any other securities plaintiffs’ firm.

Main Menu