St. Jude Medical, Inc. : Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against St. Jude Medical, Inc.
12/10/2012| 06:15pm US/Eastern
& Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on behalf of
all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of St. Jude
Medical, Inc. ("St. Jude" or the "Company") (NYSE: STJ)
between October 17, 2012 and November 20, 2012, 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 St. Jude during the Class Period, or
purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold St. Jude, 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 email@example.com,
or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/st-jude-medical-inc-stj-durata.
St. Jude, a Minnesota corporation headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota,
develops, manufactures and distributes cardiovascular medical devices
for the global cardiac rhythm management, cardiology and cardiac surgery
and atrial fibrillation therapy areas and neurostimulation medical
devices for the management of chronic pain. 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 relevant information
from the investment community relating to a report issued by the United
States Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") for one of its chief
products, the Durata defibrillation lead. As a result of defendants'
false and misleading statements, the Company's stock traded at
artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. Capitalizing on
this was the Company's Chief Executive Officer, Daniel J. Starks, who
took advantage of the artificially inflated prices of St. Jude stock,
and sold 200,000 shares for proceeds totaling more than $7.6 million.
According to the Complaint, the Company stated during an October 17,
2012 earnings call that a St. Jude production facility located in
Sylmar, California was undergoing an FDA inspection. This inspection was
expected to generate the issuance of a "Form 483" - a form used by FDA
investigators to list observations of objectionable conditions found
during the course of an inspection. On October 24, 2012, the Company
filed a Form 8-K with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission ("SEC"), attaching a heavily redacted version of the Form 483
issued by the FDA. The version released by the Company fails to include
any product name associated with the inspection results.
However, on November 20, 2012, the FDA released its own version of the
Form 483 for its inspection of the Sylmar facility. The version released
by the FDA, while still redacted, nevertheless showed clearly that most
of the observations of objectionable conditions listed on the form
pertained to Durata. Despite knowing that most of the inspection report
concerned issues pertaining to Durata, the defendants chose to conceal
this information from the investing public by issuing the heavily
redacted version. On this news, shares in St. Jude declined 12%, from a
close of $35.71 per share on November 20, 2012 to $31.37 per share on
November 21, 2012, on volume of over 26 million shares.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later
than February 5, 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.
& 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
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.
Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire
© Business Wire 2012