NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[CherryTree1]

When you allege:

This case was a joke from the onset. The Yonemura case on the other hand they obviously didn't feel they could win and therefore plan to settle.

what do you base that on? I have not seen anything that would make one believe that the Yonemura case has any more merit than this case and nothing that indicates they would settle in a way where Linda, Cognate or NWBO would admit guilt to underhanded dealings or providing misleading information. The final settlement will most likely be as this: "case dismissed". Did you not closely read Senti's post. The lawsuit is based on the same issues the Yonemura case. In case you missed them here are some of the more relevant segmenats:

These heightened pleading standards exist because Congress recognized the potential for abuse in the securities fraud context, including 'nuisance filings, targeting of deep-pocket defendants, vexatious discovery requests and manipulation by class action lawyers.'" Accordingly, the Court should "be vigilant in preventing meritless securities fraud claims from reaching the discovery phase of litigation."

Finally, Plaintiffs unsuccessfully attempt to raise a "strong inference of scienter" based upon Defendants' "unique financial motive to inflate NW Bio's stock price." Specifically, they allege that "NW Bio operated as a fiefdom for the personal benefit of Powers," and "ecause the lavish benefits that NW Bio conferred upon Cognate, Powers, and her Toucan Group of companies far exceeded the Company's assets, NW Bio had to repeatedly tap the public markets." Even if that were true, it does not follow that "defendant acted with the required state of mind" to defraud investors. "A strong inference of fraud does not arise merely from seeking capital to support a risky venture. Indeed, the motivations to raise capital or increase one's own compensation are common to every company and thus add little to an inference of fraud." That Defendants may have wished to raise capital for other business ventures does not, on its own, establish fraudulent intent.

To conclude, it bears noting that:

All investments carry risk, particularly in a field like biopharmaceuticals. If we inferred scienter from every bullish statement by a pharmaceutical company that was trying to raise funds, we would choke off the lifeblood of innovation in medicine by fueling frivolous litigation — exactly what Congress sought to avoid by enacting the PSLRA.

Plaintiffs have not demonstrated how Defendants were reckless, much less deliberately misleading, and thus they fail to establish the required scienter.

scienter - a mental state in which one has knowledge that one's action, statement, etc., is wrong, deceptive, or illegal: often used as a standard of guilt

So . . . what exactly do you believe is different with the Yonemura case? I am not seeing anything whatsoever.