Jury Trial Demanded
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Case 1:14-cv-08925-KMW Document 82 Filed 05/08/15 Page 1 of 109 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Case No. 14 Civ. 8925(KMW) IN RE SALIX PHARMACEUTICALS, LTD. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ECF CASE CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Case 1:14-cv-08925-KMW Document 82 Filed 05/08/15 Page 2 of 109 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 2 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ....................................................................................... 11 III. PARTIES .......................................................................................................................... 12 A. Plaintiffs.................................................................................................................12 B. Defendants .............................................................................................................12 IV. BACKGROUND AND NATURE OF THE FRAUD...................................................... 14 A. Background Of The Company...............................................................................14 B. Salix’s Reported Wholesaler Inventory Levels Were Critical To The Company’s Business And Closely Monitored By The Company................................................................................................................16 C. Prior To The Start Of The Class Period, Defendants Stuff The Wholesale Channel With Nine Months Of Inventory For Salix’s Key Products..........................................................................................................20 D. Defendants Falsely Represent That The Wholesalers Maintained 10- To 12-Week Inventory Levels, Which Was Strictly “In Line” With Strong Demand .............................................................................................23 E. Following the Santarus Acquisition, Defendants Immediately Stuffed The Channels For Santarus’s Products While Continuing To Conceal The True Inventory Levels For Xifaxan And Apriso.........................26 F. In An Effort To Conceal Their Fraud, Defendants Manufacture False Reasons To Explain Shifting Inventory Levels............................................30 G. Defendants Next Falsely Claim That Inventories For All Products Are Being Reduced And Will “Normalize” At Seven- To Eight- Week Levels...........................................................................................................33 H. Once Defendants Are Forced To Provide Confidential Due Diligence To Allergan, It Immediately Identifies Serious Problems With Salix’s Wholesaler Inventory Levels And Calls Off The Acquisition.............................................................................................................36 V. THE TRUTH IS REVEALED.......................................................................................... 39 VI. POST-CLASS PERIOD EVENTS AND ADMISSIONS ................................................ 45 i Case 1:14-cv-08925-KMW Document 82 Filed 05/08/15 Page 3 of 109 A. Further Confirming the Material Negative Impact of the Fraud, Salix Withdraws Its Guidance for 2014, Slashes Guidance for 2015 and CEO Logan Also “Retires” .............................................................................45 B. Salix Restates Its Financial Results .......................................................................47 C. Valeant Acquires Salix And Further Confirms That Defendants Had “As Close To Perfect Information As You Could Have” About Salix’s True Wholesaler Inventory Levels .................................................51 D. Salix’s Board Determines That Logan And Derbyshire “Intentionally Engaged In Wrongdoing” That Resulted In “Material Harm” ....................................................................................................53 VII. ADDITIONAL ALLLEGATIONS OF SCIENTER ........................................................ 54 VIII. DEFENDANTS’ FALSE AND MISLEADING STATEMENTS ................................... 64 A. Materially False And Misleading Statements And Omissions Concerning the Third Quarter of 2013...................................................................64 B. Materially Misleading Statements and Omissions Concerning the Company’s 2014 Guidance....................................................................................69 C. Materially False and Misleading Statements and Omissions Concerning the Fourth Quarter of 2013 and Fiscal Year 2013..............................70 D. Materially False and Misleading Statements and Omissions Concerning the First Quarter of 2014 ....................................................................75 E. Materially False and Misleading Statements Concerning the Second Quarter of 2014 .........................................................................................84 IX. LOSS CAUSATION......................................................................................................... 95 X. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS ................................................................................. 96 XI. PRESUMPTION OF RELIANCE.................................................................................... 98 XII. NO SAFE HARBOR ........................................................................................................ 99 XIII. CAUSES OF ACTION................................................................................................... 100 XIV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF ................................................................................................. 105 XV. JURY DEMAND............................................................................................................ 106 ii Case 1:14-cv-08925-KMW Document 82 Filed 05/08/15 Page 4 of 109 1. Lead Plaintiff the Pentwater Funds (defined below), by its undersigned counsel, hereby brings this action on behalf of itself and all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded common stock of Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (“Salix” or the “Company”), purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded call options on Salix common stock, or sold publicly traded put options on Salix common stock, during the period from November 8, 2013 through November 6, 2014, inclusive (the “Class Period”) and were damaged thereby. Lead Plaintiff brings this action against Salix, its former CEO Carolyn Logan and its former CFO Adam Derbyshire. Defendants Logan and Derbyshire are sometimes referred to herein as the “Executive Defendants.” 2. Lead Plaintiff alleges the following based upon personal knowledge as to itself and its own acts and upon information and belief as to all other matters. Lead Plaintiff’s information and belief is based on, inter alia, the independent investigation of Lead Counsel. This investigation included a review and analysis of: (i) regulatory filings made by Salix, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. (“Valeant”), and Santarus, Inc. (“Santarus”) with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”); (ii) research reports by securities and financial analysts; (iii) transcripts of Salix’s, Valeant’s, and Santarus’s earnings and other investor conference calls; (iv) publicly available presentations by Salix; (v) Salix’s press releases and media reports; (vi) economic analyses of the movement and pricing data associated with Salix publicly traded common stock and options; (vii) consultations with relevant consultants and experts; and (viii) other publicly available material and data identified herein. Counsel’s investigation into the factual allegations contained herein is continuing, and many of the relevant facts are known only by Defendants or are exclusively within their custody or control. Lead Plaintiff believes that Case 1:14-cv-08925-KMW Document 82 Filed 05/08/15 Page 5 of 109 substantial additional evidentiary support will exist for the allegations set forth herein after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. I. INTRODUCTION 3. This case arises from a series of material misrepresentations by the senior executives of Salix, a specialty pharmaceutical company, concerning one of its most important metrics: its “wholesaler inventory levels.” The Company’s “wholesaler inventory levels” represented the number of weeks’ worth of inventory that the Company’s wholesaler customers kept on hand to fill orders placed by pharmacies. These figures were supposed to be based on actual demand for Salix’s core drug products, which directly impacted current and future revenue. Accordingly, Salix’s wholesale inventory levels served as the primary indicator of the strength of the Company’s present and future revenue stream, and the market looked to this metric to assess the Company’s value. 4. To reassure investors of Salix’s continued revenue growth, Defendants repeatedly represented before and throughout the Class Period that wholesalers maintained 10 to 12 weeks of inventory for Salix’s blockbuster drug, Xifaxan, and its other key products. For example, throughout the Class Period, former Salix CEO Carolyn Logan and former CFO Adam Derbyshire falsely represented that inventory levels for Xifaxan and other drugs were tightly maintained at “10 to 12 weeks,” “exactly where we want to keep it,” were “right in line with demand,” and “demand for our key products [was] healthy.” Defendants also reassured the market that they closely monitored the wholesaler inventory levels that they reported to investors.