Seeds of their own destruction. Did anyone besides
Post# of 72446
Posted On: 03/13/2016 8:38:22 PM
Seeds of their own destruction. Did anyone besides me notice that Rosen is really trying to hang their hat on the stupid Menon Ph.D. business? Here's what they are using as the ultimate basis of their claim that this should go to trial (where surely they must know they would not prevail -- just a delaying tactic):
Well, the fact is, no reasonable minds would think that an obscure article from years before the period in question is material to their investment decision. What's material is the scientific progress of the company. (And, despite Rosen's best efforts to misstate company positions, Mako/Rosen have absolutely no basis of fact upon which to criticize the company's scientific progress.)
Does any reasonable person think that a misstatement about a degree in an article (which Menon did not write) would be enough to induce someone to invest in a company? Would any reasonable investor invest in Company A because the chief scientific officer has a Ph.D. from Harvard, and not in Company B because the chief scientific officer has a Ph.D. from somewhere else? Utterly absurd.
Quote:
‘a complaint may not properly be dismissed ... on the ground that the alleged misstatements or omissions are not material unless they are so obviously unimportant to a reasonable investor that reasonable minds could not differ on the question of their importance.’”
Well, the fact is, no reasonable minds would think that an obscure article from years before the period in question is material to their investment decision. What's material is the scientific progress of the company. (And, despite Rosen's best efforts to misstate company positions, Mako/Rosen have absolutely no basis of fact upon which to criticize the company's scientific progress.)
Does any reasonable person think that a misstatement about a degree in an article (which Menon did not write) would be enough to induce someone to invest in a company? Would any reasonable investor invest in Company A because the chief scientific officer has a Ph.D. from Harvard, and not in Company B because the chief scientific officer has a Ph.D. from somewhere else? Utterly absurd.
(0)
(0)