Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[loanranger]

A few more examples for timing purposes

One more time......Obviously not all class actions are the same (facts, lawyering skills and judicial temperament being some obvious differences).

Kuyat v. BioMimetic
11/28/11 amended complaint
2/27/12 motion to dismiss
8/28/12 motion granted

5/1/13 Notice of appeal
3/28/14 Judgment affirmed



Police Retirement System of St. Louis v. Intuitive Surgical,
4/15/11 amended complaint
5/23/11 motion to dismiss
8/10/11 motion granted BUT…plaintiff was allowed to file an amended complaint

9/12/11 amended complaint
10/13/11 motion to dismiss
5/22/12 motion granted

6/20/12 Notice of Appeal
7/16/14 Judgment affirmed



SCHWARTZ v. URBAN OUTFITTERS, INC. et al
3/10/14 amended complaint
5/9/14 motion to dismiss
5/4/15 motion denied



Menaldi v OCH-ZIFF CAPITAL MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC
11/24/14 amended complaint
3/16/15 motion(s) to dismiss
2/17/16 “In an opinion today, Judge Oetken allowed portions of securities class action against the asset management firm Och-Ziff Capital Management to proceed past a motion to dismiss.”
http://securities.stanford.edu/filings-documents/1052/OZCMG00_01/2016217_r01x_14CV03251.pdf
0Note:
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Pomerantz LLP (New York)
600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · [e-mail]/
The Rosen Law Firm P.A. (New York)
275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor, The Rosen Law Firm P.A. (New York), NY 10016
[phone] [phone]