Did CEO Deirdre Y. Gillespie know of the DSMBs findings prior to the conference?

In the U.S. you can civilly sue anyone (certain entities such as government agencies excepted) for pretty much anything. What you will incur in attorneys' fees in the process, and whether you will ultimately succeed in your civil action, however, are a totally different matter.

There is also the issue of statute of limitations, which typically (but not always) runs from the time the plaintiff(s) discovered the alleged negligence. I'm not sure how long that statute might be in your particular case (and whether it has already elapsed), but a competent securities attorney would be able to tell you.

Typically when dealing with corporations, their officers and securities, your kind of complaint would be handled through a *class action* lawsuit. There is a number of law firms--most of them located on the East Coast--that specialize in class actions. (A Google search, I'm sure, will return quite a few hits.)

If it turns out that you do have a case, you could be the lead plaintiff in your class action if you so desire, although you'll need to meet certain criteria, which again a lawfirm specializing in securities matters can explain to you.

[forum_admin]

BioMarin Lawsuit

On May 22, 2009, the Company and its directors were sued by BioMarin Pharmaceutical Company ("BioMarin") in California Superior Court, alleging breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and breach of fiduciary duty. BioMarin, which had been the Company's development partner for Riquent, sued to force the Company to accelerate the timing for the registration of approximately 10 million shares of restricted common stock that BioMarin had purchased from the Company when entering into the collaboration for Riquent in January 2009. Additionally, BioMarin seeks to recover damages for any loss it may suffer due to the alleged breach. The Company believes these claims are wholly without merit. BioMarin sought a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction compelling the Company to effect the registration of these shares notwithstanding what the Company believes are longer time periods afforded under the relevant agreement. Since filing this lawsuit, the Court has twice denied BioMarin the relief it sought. Most recently, on June 2, 2009, BioMarin's motion for a Preliminary Injunction was denied by the Court, with the Court finding that BioMarin had not demonstrated that it was likely to succeed on the merits of its suit and that the contract did not require the Company to register the shares in the accelerated time period as demanded by BioMarin. Notwithstanding the Court's findings against BioMarin, BioMarin has refused to drop its claims without a guaranteed price at which it would be able to ultimately sell its stock. Accordingly, the lawsuit remains pending, although the Company will be seeking to have the lawsuit dismissed and will bring any viable counterclaims that it may have.

Impact of Lawsuit on Potential Transactions

Prior to the filing of the BioMarin lawsuit, the Company had made significant progress negotiating a potential merger with another company (the "Merger") and was working toward the execution of a definitive merger agreement and the announcement of the transaction. However, in light of the pending lawsuit by BioMarin and the expected impact on the ability to complete the Merger, as well as the potential litigation damages and the defense costs, the Company's Board of Directors (the "Board") concluded that it is impractical for the Company to pursue the Merger or other any similar transaction with another party. Because the Board currently does not expect that the litigation will be resolved in a sufficiently short period of time to allow the Company to pursue other transactions, on June 12, 2009, the Board determined that it is (i) necessary to abandon attempts to enter into a merger or other significant transaction and (ii) in the best interests of the Company to wind down the business and to seek to discharge remaining obligations to creditors. If the litigation can be resolved satisfactorily in a reasonably short period of time, it is possible that the Company may again seek to consummate a merger or other transaction. However, at present, the Company does not consider this to be a likely outcome. After discharging obligations to creditors, and in light of the expected defense costs and expenses associated with the BioMarin lawsuit, the Company does not expect that there will be any significant remaining assets available for distribution to the Company's stockholders following the wind down.

Source:
Form 8-K for LA JOLLA PHARMACEUTICAL CO (SEC Filings for LJPC; 12-Jun-2009)

[Life Sciences, Partnerships, Lawsuit]

by Denise Gellene

Hard times can make for hard feelings between former drug development partners, which seems to be what’s happening between Novato, CA-based BioMarin (NASDAQ: BMRN) and San Diego’s ailing La Jolla Pharmaceutical (NASDAQ: LJPC). Once the love was gone, BioMarin just couldn’t get rid of the La Jolla Pharmaceutical shares it owned fast enough. So it sued. Accusing its former partner of breach of contract, BioMarin filed suit last month in California Superior Court against La Jolla Pharmaceutical for failing to speed registration of its shares with the SEC, a step that must be completed before the shares can be sold. La Jolla denied the allegation, which it disclosed in an SEC filing.

Now La Jolla is trying to get the lawsuit dismissed. Worries about its litigation with BioMarin derailed talks with an unidentified party interested in buying La Jolla, the company said in its SEC filing. La Jolla further disclosed that its board has decided to wind down the business because a merger is no longer likely. In April, the company cut 75 of its 86 employees. Calls to La Jolla executives weren’t returned. Ryan A. Murr, a San Diego-based attorney for La Jolla Pharmaceutical, said he wasn’t authorized to comment.

Denise Gellene is a former Los Angeles Times science writer and regular contributor to Xconomy. You can reach her at dgellene@xconomy.com

MORE @ After the Breakup: BioMarin Says Ex-Partner La Jolla Pharmaceutical Dragging its Feet on Stock Registration | Xconomy

[forum_admin]

Form 8-K for LA JOLLA PHARMACEUTICAL CO


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23-Jul-2009

Other Events



Item 8.01 Other Events.
Dismissal of BioMarin Lawsuit

On July 17, 2009, La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company (the "Company"), BioMarin Pharmaceutical Company ("BioMarin") and the Company's directors executed and delivered a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release (the "Release"), pursuant to which (i) BioMarin released all claims previously asserted against the Company and its directors, as described in the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed June 12, 2009 (the "Form 8-K"), and (ii) the Company and its directors released all counterclaims that they may have otherwise asserted against BioMarin. Pursuant to the Release, BioMarin is required to dismiss the Lawsuit (defined below) with prejudice. Other than the mutual release of claims and the dismissal of the Lawsuit, no other consideration is provided for in the Release and no amounts will be paid to BioMarin. BioMarin had sued the Company and its directors in California Superior Court (the "Lawsuit"), alleging breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and breach of fiduciary duty relating to the Company's registration of stock sold to BioMarin in January 2009 in connection with a license and development agreement for Riquent.

Biomarin dismissed the lawsuit so that it can unload its shares at a higher price. Biomarin began unloading shares at .20-23 cents but when news came out of the dismissal of the lawsuits, shares went up all the way to .34. This is when the biggest dumptrucks came..

LJPC to liquidate assets and don't expect any money left over for Shareholders. In other words the stock is not worth a penny per share.

Summary of LA JOLLA PHARMACEUTICAL CO - Yahoo! Finance

[langweishan]

Thankiossk Cool!

It is possible if e.g. there were any fraudulent or manipulative deals made in connection with the entire matter.

If you are into bio tech and knew about LJPC, the biggest scam is they kept taking people's money for years in R&D dollars for a product that had no value. BioMarine can say, "hey, the data was good, we invested and we lost but our analysis was fine", is BS. They got taken. But they can't do anything about it without looking like idiots who didn't do DD on LJPC. How the hell can the last trial fail just after they took Bio's $10mm+ in cash? On the last stage...

UPDATE 1-La Jolla to seek stockholders' approval of dissolution
Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:32pm EDT

• Stockholders expected to receive $0.028 and $0.045/shr
• Co. writes down value of clinical-stage drug Riquent

Oct 15 (Reuters) - La Jolla Pharmaceutical Co (LJPC.O) has called a special meeting of stockholders on Oct 30. to vote on a plan of the company's liquidation and dissolution.

In a statment late on Wednsday, the U.S. firm said it would expect to dissolve shortly after the stockholders' meeting and then commence a liquidation process.

The company said it expects to satisfy remaining debt obligations and distribute between $0.028 and $0.045 per share to holders of about 66 million shares of the common stock.

Shares of the company closed at 21 cents Wednesday on Nasdaq.

The book value of LJPC a scam or truth? LJPC executives, should go to prison, since we have been cheated and lied to us all the time with their balance sheets given to the public marketplace. Where is the true value in books that talk all the time? ... Even in the last balance sheet at 30 June 2009 the result of the book value of the stock exceeds $ 2.3 dollars and now in less than 3 months, say the value of the stock will be less than $ 0.05 cents. Apart from terrorist panic this will cause the market seems to be a real scam to shareholders.