In This Article:
NEW YORK, Nov. 07, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Mesoblast Limited (“Mesoblast” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: MESO) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and docketed under 20-cv-09111, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons other than Defendants who purchased or otherwise, acquired Mesoblast securities between April 16, 2019 and October 1, 2020, inclusive (the “Class Period”). Plaintiff pursues claims against the Defendants under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).
If you are a shareholder who purchased Mesoblast securities during the class period, you have until December 7, 2020, to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at newaction@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.
[Click here for information about joining the class action]
Mesoblast develops allogeneic cellular medicines using its proprietary mesenchymal lineage cell therapy platform. Its lead product candidate, RYONCIL (remestemcel-L), is an investigational therapy comprising mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow. In February 2018, the Company announced that remestemcel-L met its primary endpoint in a Phase 3 trial to treat children with steroid refractory (“SR”) acute graft versus host disease (“aGVHD”).
In early 2020, Mesoblast completed its rolling submission of its Biologics License Application (“BLA”) with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) to secure marketing authorization to commercialize remestemcel-L for children with steroid refractory aGVHD.
The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational, and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) comparative analyses between Mesoblast’s Phase 3 trial and three historical studies did not support the effectiveness of remestemcel-L for steroid refractory aGVHD because of design differences between the four studies; (ii) as a result, the FDA was reasonably likely to require further clinical studies; (iii) as a result, the commercialization of remestemcel-L in the U.S. was likely to be delayed; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.