https://www.aidshealth.org/2021/09/ahf-dumbfo...gma-today/
ALSO: represented them JUST THIS YEAR defending them: plaintiffs charge that "Gilead's decision to defer development of TAF to maximize its profits breached its duty of reasonable care to users of TDF. They also assert a claim for fraudulent concealment, reasoning that Gilead had a duty to disclose information about TAF to users of TDF."
IOW, Gilead quashed its own drug in order to make as much money as possible from the first one (without disclosing important side effect information about it), before releasing the second one. Hmmm quashing drugs, even their own, so they can make money from their own inferior drugs...
Not quite sure how to read the decision -- can an attorney help? Double negatives, etc.:
Gilead's petition for a writ of mandate is denied in part and granted in part. Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the superior court to vacate its order denying Gilead's motion for summary judgment, dated June 13, 2022, and enter a new and different order denying summary adjudication of Count I of plaintiffs’ Master Long Form Complaint for Damages and granting summary adjudication of Count V of that document. The stay imposed in our order of September 9, 2022, shall remain in effect until issuance of the remittitur. Plaintiffs shall recover their costs on appeal.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ca-court-of...88551.html
ALSO: represented them JUST THIS YEAR defending them: plaintiffs charge that "Gilead's decision to defer development of TAF to maximize its profits breached its duty of reasonable care to users of TDF. They also assert a claim for fraudulent concealment, reasoning that Gilead had a duty to disclose information about TAF to users of TDF."
IOW, Gilead quashed its own drug in order to make as much money as possible from the first one (without disclosing important side effect information about it), before releasing the second one. Hmmm quashing drugs, even their own, so they can make money from their own inferior drugs...
Not quite sure how to read the decision -- can an attorney help? Double negatives, etc.:
Gilead's petition for a writ of mandate is denied in part and granted in part. Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the superior court to vacate its order denying Gilead's motion for summary judgment, dated June 13, 2022, and enter a new and different order denying summary adjudication of Count I of plaintiffs’ Master Long Form Complaint for Damages and granting summary adjudication of Count V of that document. The stay imposed in our order of September 9, 2022, shall remain in effect until issuance of the remittitur. Plaintiffs shall recover their costs on appeal.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ca-court-of...88551.html
4
