Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc (AUPH)

[micham2012]

I practiced law for 46 years, the last 8 as General Counsel for a publicly traded start up company. I am not a securities lawyer, but have a feel for what is involved.

I think that meaningful discussions are in progress, and find it interesting that those knowledgeable on this board speculate that there may be multiple suitors. That would explain the company's silence.

Once a deal is struck, disclosure is imperative. Similarly, if the Bloomberg rumor is false and unfounded, I believe that disclosure would be advisable, if not imperative.

The failure to disclose known material information is as problematical legally as the disclosure of incorrect information, although more difficult to prove.

I could be wrong, but the only thing that would cause me to say nothing for 5 days after the Bloomberg rumor is that the story is a complicated one that can not be summarized adequately in a couple of sentences. I don't think the company has an obligation to disclose negotiations. But I do think the company should consider confirming or denying a rumor that has produced such gains on such high volume. With multiple suitors that becomes dicey to say the least.

FWIW, I think it is highly unlikely that AUPH and a large pharma have struck a deal, but have agreed to delay announcement for some reason. I think that would be a mistake. It is very hard to keep a lid on these things, and a delayed announcement invites problems with the SEC.

All just IMHO -- I don't have any idea what is going on. Just trying to make sense of it.