WILMINGTON, Del. -- (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Spectrum” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GS: SPPI) between August 8, 2012 and March 12, 2013, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the “Complaint”).
If you purchased shares of Spectrum during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold Spectrum, and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/spectrum-pharmaceuticals-inc-sppi.
Spectrum is a biotechnology company with fully integrated commercial and drug development operations with a primary focus in hematology and oncology. In the United States, Spectrum primarily markets two oncology drugs, FUSILEV® (levoleucovorin) (“FUSILEV”) and ZEVALIN®. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants concealed from the investing public that: (a) once the availability of leucovorin, a generic folate analog, increased, Spectrum’s sales of FUSILEV would plummet; (b) the purported advantages of FUSILEV over leucovorin would not be sufficient for clinics and hospitals to continue to opt for the more expensive FUSILEV once leucovorin was available in larger quantities; and (c) based upon the above, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its revenue and earnings during the Class Period. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.
According to the Complaint, during the Class Period, defendants violated the federal securities laws by disseminating false and misleading statements to the investing public in connection with FUSILEV, and concealed the impact that the increased availability of competing generic drug (leucovorin) would have on sales of FUSILEV. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, Spectrum’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $13.05 per share on September 18, 2012.
On March 12, 2013, after the market closed, the Company issued a press release providing its full-year revenue outlook. The Company reported that sales of FUSILEV, the Company’s most revenue-generating drug, would be dropping significantly due to anticipated changes in ordering patterns for FUSILEV, due in part to the recent stabilization of the folate analog market. The Company reported sales will be approximately $10 to $15 million for the first quarter of 2013, and approximately $80 to $90 million for the fiscal year 2013. Additionally, the Company forecast full-year 2013 revenues in the range of $160 to $180 million, much lower than analysts’ revenue expectations of $297.33 for 2013. On this news, shares in Spectrum dropped over 37%, closing at $7.79 per share on March 13, 2013, from a close of $12.43 per share on March 12, 2013, on volume of over 22 million shares.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than May 13, 2013. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.