My response to a very good LoanRanger post on iHub
Post# of 72446
Posted On: 11/25/2015 9:29:38 AM
My response to a very good LoanRanger post on iHub...
Rosen tried to make the paragraph below sound scary, but it is not very impressive. Take note of the wording of the last sentence. It says that they HAVE additional information that IF it is investigated further MIGHT result in discovering something negative about the defendants.
As to the rest of it, I don't know that either of the other factors mentioned in the paragraph, even if true, would be enough to sustain a cause of action. Just being "affiliated" with "stock promoters" and other "failed companies" certainly would not be enough.
As to the claim that Menon "exaggerated" his role at Eli Lily; he apparently did win a significant award during his time at Eli Lily so that claim seems unlikely to be true. And "falsely" claiming they had prominent advisors is apparently referring to Emil Frie. Hopefully, Leo or Dr. M has an email trail with Dr. Frie that says otherwise. But again, I find it hard to believe that any of this is enough to sustain a cause of action.
This whole letter is just deliberate obfuscation in the hope that the Judge will allow Rosen to embark upon a long and costly fishing expedition that they can leverage into a settlement.
From the Rosen response...
Rosen tried to make the paragraph below sound scary, but it is not very impressive. Take note of the wording of the last sentence. It says that they HAVE additional information that IF it is investigated further MIGHT result in discovering something negative about the defendants.
As to the rest of it, I don't know that either of the other factors mentioned in the paragraph, even if true, would be enough to sustain a cause of action. Just being "affiliated" with "stock promoters" and other "failed companies" certainly would not be enough.
As to the claim that Menon "exaggerated" his role at Eli Lily; he apparently did win a significant award during his time at Eli Lily so that claim seems unlikely to be true. And "falsely" claiming they had prominent advisors is apparently referring to Emil Frie. Hopefully, Leo or Dr. M has an email trail with Dr. Frie that says otherwise. But again, I find it hard to believe that any of this is enough to sustain a cause of action.
This whole letter is just deliberate obfuscation in the hope that the Judge will allow Rosen to embark upon a long and costly fishing expedition that they can leverage into a settlement.
From the Rosen response...
Quote:
"In addition, if granted leave to amend, the Complaint will include new allegations showing that Defendants have previously exaggerated Menon’s role in the development of important drugs for Eli Lily, falsely claimed that prominent scientists were scientific advisors for Cellceutix, affiliated with aggressive boiler room stock promoters, and have previously been affiliated with numerous failed companies. Plaintiff has also, since filing the First Amended Complaint, have obtained additional information that, upon further investigation, may shed further light on Defendants’ scienter."
(0)
(0)