Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc fka ARIA

[glass_half_full]

So on this point:

Quote:
HB both lied about the SAEs

Prove it. Judge said he didn't..

It's not clear whether you mean the "Judge said he didn't [lie about the SAEs]" or the "Judge said he didn't [prove it]."

I sort of assumed the former, since the latter is somewhat of a tautology given the ruling.

But if you want a Rorschach test excerpt from the opinion that sums up how some of the more important claims were decided at this point, consider this from pages 14 and 16:

Section 10(b) requires the plaintiff to show scienter, i.e. that the speaker “acted with fraudulent intent or knowing or reckless disregard of his obligation to disclose.” ... PSLRA requires that a strong inference of scienter be pled, amounting to a “cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference one could draw from the facts alleged.”
...
Upon review of the alleged misrepresentations regarding serious adverse events, dosage reductions, and forecasts on the long-term safety and efficacy of ponatinib, the Court determines that while certain material misstatements and omissions were indeed made by the ARIAD Defendants, the Plaintiffs fail to establish that they were made with scienter.

Make of that what you will.