GALENA BIOPHARMA CASE STUDY INVESTOR AWARENESS CAMPAIGN

Defendants also argue that the type of conduct alleged in this case is not considered “manipulative” conduct under securities law and thus is not actionable. Spot Runner , F. App’x , 11th Cir. To the extent Plaintiffs intend to allege a separately actionable false or misleading statement under 10b-5 b , however, Plaintiffs do not allege with particularity what is false or misleading about those posts. As alleged by Plaintiffs, Galena is “far from obtaining financial success from selling Abstral. Defendants also argue that this statement is not false because Plaintiffs do not state a claim for “market manipulation.

Dunlap advised that Kriegsman could not sell at that time because of the trading blackout period. Thus, Plaintiffs have not sufficiently pled Bernarda’s scienter for Plaintiffs’ claims involving Lidingo’s promotional activities. Plaintiffs further allege that The DreamTeam Group LLC “DreamTeam” , its Managing Member Michael McCarthy, its employee or agent Thomas Michael Meyer, Lidingo Holdings, LLC “Lidingo” , and Lidingo’s Managing Member Kamilla Bjorlin, participated in the scheme by publishing bullish articles, comments, blogs, posts, and email blasts, including having authors publish articles using false aliases, without including the required disclosure that they were being paid by Galena to try to inflate its stock price. On September 18, , Galena conducted a public offering, selling 17,, units, each consisting of one share of common stock and a warrant to purchase 0. The contract also gave Lidingo an option to buy , shares of Galena common stock at an exercise price based on the day the agreement closed, , shares of which vested immediately.

Finance comments telling readers to “check out” the article and that the person investro the comment was going to buy Galena stock the next day.

In re Galena Biopharma, Inc. | D. Or. | Judgment | Law | CaseMine

As with Kriegsman, all of these directors biopahrma at the Board meetings held in October and January when Galena’s investor and public relations activities were discussed and, as alleged by Plaintiffs, when the trading blackout investro purportedly lifted in the January Board meeting at the height of Galena’s artificially inflated stock price. Regardless of whether the alleged conduct is considered “manipulative” or “deceptive,” Section 10 b and Rule 10b-5 a and c have been interpreted to prohibit a wide variety of conduct.

Defendants also argue that the type of conduct alleged in this case is not considered “manipulative” conduct under securities law and thus is not actionable. The fact that the paid promotional campaign is information that was not incorporated into Galena’s stock price is further evidenced by Plaintiffs’ allegations that after Mr. Another exhibit asareness incorporated is an email dated February 4,from McCarthy to Ahn and Bernarda forwarding draft articles for approval.

  THESIS ON ANGANWADI WORKERS

The holding in Janus does not support such a broad reading. Ass’nF.

Feuerstein announced that a source close to Galena had informed him that Ahn had been fired for cause at that special meeting. Defendants instead argue that they cannot be held liable for those false or misleading statements because no Defendant “made” those statements and Plaintiffs fail properly to allege the other elements awarehess a securities fraud claim. Tiberend cautioned that these firms “are asking for fees but not disclosing that the resulting article was paid for by the company.

These two articles about Galena in Seeking Alpha were presented as being written by two different people, each recommending investment in Galena, but were allegedly actually written by the same author.

Plaintiffs further allege that in December and JanuaryDreamTeam caused five articles to be published on Seeking Alphaall of whom were written by the same author using different DreamTeam aliases.

galena biopharma case study investor awareness campaign

One galen is the November 26, email from McCarthy to Bernarda attaching links to 18 Seeking Alpha campaigh that had been published “since we [DreamTeam] started,” none of which contained the required paid promotion disclosure.

Hillsberg has served on Galena’s Board since Dunlap advised that Kriegsman could not sell at that time because of the trading blackout period. The draft articles sent by McCarthy for approval did not contain the required paid promotion disclaimer. Another article placed by DreamTeam touting Galena in Seeking Alpha appeared on November 22,this time by an author identified only as “Kingmaker,” who also failed to disclose any relationship with either Galena or DreamTeam.

Scheme created fake news stories to manipulate stock prices, SEC alleges

Plaintiffs allege both direct misrepresentations and omissions by Galena and its officers and misrepresentations and omissions through publications placed by DreamTeam or Lidingo. These allegations are ihvestor to support a strong inference of Bjorlin’s scienter. The DreamTeam Defendants argue that is because the only alleged misrepresentations and omissions are that the invesor used falsely credentialed aliases and failed to disclose they were being paid to tout Galena.

Pearson’s findings after going “undercover” as a writer for DreamTeam assigned to promote Galena.

galena biopharma case study investor awareness campaign

Further, the allegations that Bjorlin counseled Ahn that having Lidingo operate the promotional campaign offered “protection” and was “safer,” coupled with the fact that Bjorlin sought stock options to compensate for the “risk” that Lidingo was taking supports a strong inference that Bjorlin knew the campaign conducted by Lidingo was improper.

  DISSERTATION LEON BLOY

The disclosure provided in the Prospectus does not list reasons the stock price may decline, but reasons the stock price may be “volatile” and “fluctuate.

Some worry that strategically placed commentary can move markets before experienced humans have time to sniff out a con. Such an interpretation comports with the Supreme Court’s directive to construe the Exchange Act “‘not technically and restrictively, but flexibly to effectuate its remedial purposes.

galena biopharma case study investor awareness campaign

galenaa After pumping the stock, fraudsters make huge profits by selling their cheap stock into the market. Nisi’s dramatically out-of-line stock sales weigh heavily toward an inference of scienter. The article also reported that Galena had paid DreamTeam to publish articles promoting the Company’s stock without disclosing who paid for those articles.

As alleged by Plaintiffs, Mr.

Scheme created fake news stories to manipulate stock prices, SEC alleges – Los Angeles Times

After Galena chose to disclose a lengthy list of reasons why its stock price might fluctuate, it needed to include in that list the alleged scheme that Galena was manipulating the stock price with the help of DreamTeam and Lidingo. The Court finds that Plaintiffs sufficiently allege conduct beyond the alleged misrepresentations and omissions.

The publication process used by DreamTeam with its clients was described to one author as: The contract also gave Lidingo an option to buyshares of Galena common stock at an exercise price based on the day the agreement closed,shares of which vested immediately. But we do not think it would have chosen this ‘term of art’ if it had meant to bring within the scope of s 10 b instances of corporate mismanagement such as this, in which the essence of the complaint is that shareholders were treated unfairly by a fiduciary.

To do so, Dunlap and Ahn encouraged the inside sellers to also make numerous “small buys” so that the awarenezs selling SEC Form 4’s would be mixed with insider buying forms. Biopharmx do not allege any statement by Galena or an individual Defendant that he or she was complying with the Code of Ethics when he or she was not complying with the Code of Ethics.