Debates9 963919 9878034 Final Group Paper

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Debates9 963919 9878034 Final Group Paper Group 9 Against Edison- Potential Patients Kendall Travis, Charles Goff, Jenna Lang, Isaiah Watts Position: Against Edison Perspective: Potential Patients Strategy: Against Edison- Potential Patients Background As appealing as Theranos’s low prices are for blood testing, the cost of that is results that are far from the truth. The lab technicians who work at Theranos have little faith in the tests that they do. They feel criminal, uncertain, and concerned enough to the point where they would never do a test there or allow a family member to. For anyone to work there, non-disclosure agreements have to be signed. Clearly the company is hiding something. And for the many workers who have quit Theranos, they have spoken up about how defective everything is there, knowing it would result in the harassment and hounding from Theranos’s team of lawyers and higher up individuals, a price they were willing to pay to warn potential patients like us. The life-changing effects of Theranos’s work have all been anecdotal claims from Elizabeth Holmes, her work is discovered in isolation, and also her work is impossible to achieve with a single drop of blood according to medical experts. All of these are signs of bogus science that can be tied to Theranos. The list of concerns we have compiled comes from watching The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley on HBO. The documentary alone has made it easy for us, as potential patients, to see that Theranos is a fraudulent and unfit company that is unethical for any patient to go to. What is relevant to your analysis: There are many moral and practical challenges for Edison. According to Dark Daily, there are multiple patients that have spoken out about the negative effects of Theranos testing. Breast-cancer survivor Sheri Ackert told the Wall Street Journal she panicked when her blood tests from Theranos indicated her cancer may have reoccurred. After being retested by a different clinical laboratory, her results were found to be normal. Its inaccurate results like this can change a person's life and that is not worth the cheap, fast testing of Theranos. A practical challenge regarding Edison is the machine itself. According to The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley, an individual that had worked with the machine firsthand stated that the machine functioned very poorly. It would tense up and he would have to reach in there with his hands where the needles are sharp enough to easily puncture skin. It was a mess, blood would evaporate in the room, the centrifuges would explode inside in the middle of testing, and the machine was said to be extremely small for its claimed functions. It has been said that the machine is impractical, “The laws of physics aren't going to permit us to cram all the stuff that we’ve decided needs to go in there into this little box”. An engineer working in Silicon Valley mentioned that it may be more feasible to make the box bigger but was shut down after the recommendation. Your Task/Strategy: Our strategy for our case is to make sure that Theranos never operates as a company ever again. As concerned patients we want to make sure that Elizabeth Holmes Group 9 Against Edison- Potential Patients Kendall Travis, Charles Goff, Jenna Lang, Isaiah Watts and all of her staff are held accountable for the fraud of the Edison. We will appear in court to testify against the company with evidence claiming that Theranos never cared about the correctness of their product or their patients’ safety. As a group we will discuss why Theranos’s logic is flawed and how they manipulate the public to believe why their product the Edison is the future of healthcare. The use of Edison has not been shown to the public which makes the issue of whether or not their product actually works doubtful. In the end, our main goal is to end all production relating to the company of Theranos because we as patients view Theranos as a fraudulent company that needs to be shut down. What position on the relevant elements does your strategy take: The position we take on this issue is all for technological innovation commitments! We support the idea of technological advancements and that is why we went to Edison. But we are also supporters of ethics involving business concerns, patient privacy, and patient care. It is unethical to withhold information from the using patients and to falsify numbers to keep the business running. Our biggest concern is that the patients are being deceived and negatively impacted by common misdiagnosis. We are also concerned about the wellness of the staff workers but that is another story. As for stakeholders, which is just another name for people with an interest in something such as a business, if they were investors in the company then they would probably motivate them to turn their shoulders on a terrible instance like this. And in that case, we will have opposing views. If the money is powerful enough to make them continue to support the company, then no lectures about ethics will help. I believe our strategy should be to sue the company for its wrongdoings. If all goes as planned, we hope to get Edison shutdown. Justification The reason why we as patients believe that Theranos should be sued and lose their company is because the lie to their patients about the vision of their product. When reporters and people have asked about the Edison and if Elizabeth Holmes would show us how the product works, she and all of her staff have continually told reporters that the machine was not ready to be tested. The company as a whole has made no progress at releasing any new information about their product. Elizabeth Holmes, who is the founder and CEO of Theranos, has got away with manipulating stockholders to invest in the Theranos company and product even though they have never produced any results. After Ian Gibbons, who was biochemist, leaked some private files to the New York Times about the validity of the company he shortly after committed suicide. After this instance, we as patients are determined to make sure that Theranos will not affect any patients ever again. Counterpoints Criticisms of our view are individuals that support Edison, its function, and its results. For example, the inventor of Edison Elizabeth Holmes is a strong supporter of it but there are definitely counter arguments. When people doubt the technology of Theranos and the function of the Edison machine, Elizabeth Holmes states that she is a Group 9 Against Edison- Potential Patients Kendall Travis, Charles Goff, Jenna Lang, Isaiah Watts qualified individual and that her invention will revolutionize health care. She assures that Theranos is painless, fast, easy, and reliable. This perspective of Theranos is incorrect in many ways. Elizabeth Holmes was a college dropout, she says that she is an engineer. There is no way that a college dropout would be able to revolutionize this kind of technology. Whenever Elizabeth is in an interview, she steers away from controversial questions, and constantly keeps her eyes open- showing uncomfortable body language. Stated in the program: The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley, Edison has a “comedy of errors” like not being able to transfer fluids, regulate temperature, and has constant design changes including the color, shape, and mechanics. Elizabeth Holmes was so concerned with the reputation of her company that her expert blood tester Ian Gibbons Ph.D., majorly doubted the functionality of her technology and was concerned that because of his beliefs, he would lose his job. Ian then got into bad shape with Elizabeth and her college Sunny, he fell into a deep depression and ended up committing suicide. The company of Theranos and its CEO Elizabeth Holmes, is not out to help people; the establishment and their machine Edison are not reliable. Personal Plea: After doing our research, it is clear to see that Theranos is the last place anyone should go to for their blood tests. There are too many variables in regards to Theranos that raise concern for us such as: no approval from the FDA, lab technicians who feel uncertain and criminal in their work, harmed patients speaking up about negative effects and experiences, the vagueness of the entire company and its processes, modified standard equipment, violated lab procedures and standards, lies told to the public and patients about their product, multiple signs of bogus science raised, and their hostility towards skeptics to protect their “trade secret” to list a few issues, is inexcusable. The best and safest choice we see as potential patients is to choose a different company for blood tests. Health needs to be taken seriously and processed carefully to give patients accurate results. Theranos giving inaccurate results to patients that can create unnecessary death scares is unacceptable. Test your blood at a company that has been around, proved itself to be safe, and that is capable to give its patients accurate test results that are not tampered with. Group 9 Against Edison- Potential Patients Kendall Travis, Charles Goff, Jenna Lang, Isaiah Watts Bibliography “The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley” HBO Now. Accessed November 25, 2019. https://play.hbonow.com/feature/urn:hbo:feature:GXGWJ8wyZ- K2uAwEAAAAK?icid=hbo_signin_now “Previously High-Flying Theranos Provides Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups with Valuable Lesson on How Quickly Consumer Trust Can Be Lost.” Dark Daily. Accessed November 26, 2019. https://www.darkdaily.com/previously-high-flying- theranos-provides-clinical-laboratories-and-pathology-groups-with-valuable-lesson-on- how-quickly-consumer-trust-can-be-lost/.
Recommended publications
  • Theranos As a Legal Ethics Case Study
    Vanderbilt University Law School Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 2021 How and Why Did It Go So Wrong?: Theranos as a Legal Ethics Case Study G. S. Hans Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications Part of the Legal Education Commons, and the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons DATE DOWNLOADED: Mon May 24 12:25:08 2021 SOURCE: Content Downloaded from HeinOnline Citations: Bluebook 21st ed. G. S. Hans, How and Why Did It Go So Wrong?: Theranos as a Legal Ethics Case Study, 37 GA. St. U. L. REV. 427 (2021). ALWD 6th ed. Hans, G. G., How and why did it go so wrong?: Theranos as a legal ethics case study, 37(2) Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 427 (2021). APA 7th ed. Hans, G. G. (2021). How and why did it go so wrong?: Theranos as legal ethics case study. Georgia State University Law Review, 37(2), 427-470. Chicago 17th ed. G. S. Hans, "How and Why Did It Go So Wrong?: Theranos as a Legal Ethics Case Study," Georgia State University Law Review 37, no. 2 (Winter 2021): 427-470 McGill Guide 9th ed. G S Hans, "How and Why Did It Go So Wrong?: Theranos as a Legal Ethics Case Study" (2021) 37:2 Ga St U L Rev 427. AGLC 4th ed. G S Hans, 'How and Why Did It Go So Wrong?: Theranos as a Legal Ethics Case Study' (2021) 37(2) Georgia State University Law Review 427. MLA 8th ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Squaring Venture Capital Valuations with Reality ONLINE APPENDIX
    Squaring Venture Capital Valuations with Reality ONLINE APPENDIX Will Gornall Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia Ilya A. Strebulaev Graduate School of Business, Stanford University and National Bureau of Economic Research Sept 2017 Find the full paper here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2955455 The online appendix follows. Appendix A contains the alternative names for the unicorns in our sample. Appendix B lists companies whose COIs omit information. Appendix C lists companies where we could not locate the most recent COI. Appendix D contains examples of legal text for each of the major terms. Appendix E details the major terms we found for each company in our sample. Appendix F contains comparative statics. Appendix G contains discussion of our return distribution assumptions. Appendix A: Full Legal Names and Other Names for Unicorns in Our Sample Short Name Legal Name Also Known As 23andMe 23andMe, Inc. A123 Systems A123 Systems, Inc. B456 Systems Actifio Actifio, Inc. Adaptive Biotech Adaptive Biotechnologies Adaptive TCR Corporation Age of Learning Age of Learning, Inc. Airbnb Airbnb, Inc. Airbed & Breakfast, Inc Anaplan Anaplan, Inc. AppDirect AppDirect, Inc. Origo Networks Corporation AppDynamics AppDynamics, Inc. Singularity Technologies, Inc. Appnexus AppNexus Inc. Apttus Apttus Corporation Automattic Automattic Inc. Avant Avant, Inc. Avant Credit Corporation Better Place Better Place, Inc. Better Place Holdings; Better PLC Bloom Energy Bloom Energy Corporation Bloom Energy Server; Ion America Corporation Bloom Energy Bloom Energy Corporation Ion America Corporation Blue Apron Blue Apron, Inc. Petridish Media, Inc. Box Box, Inc. Box.Net Buzzfeed BuzzFeed, Inc. Carbon3D Carbon3D, Inc. EIPI Systems, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of FOMO on Stakeholder Enrollment
    The Effect of FOMO on Stakeholder Enrollment Susan L. Young, PhD Kennesaw State University Kennesaw, GA Ph: 470-578-4536 [email protected] Birton Cowden, PhD Kennesaw State University Kennesaw, GA Ph: 470-578-36781 [email protected] 1 The Effect of FOMO on Stakeholder Enrollment Abstract Stakeholder theory suggests dishonest ventures would struggle with stakeholder enrollment, limiting resource access and ultimately failing. Yet cases exist where amoral entrepreneurs do enroll stakeholders through deceit. We propose “fear of missing out” on an opportunity facilitates enrollment by encouraging stakeholder acceptance of information asymmetry. To illustrate we use exemplar Theranos: a biotech firm which convinced stakeholders it would revolutionize healthcare, rising to a $10 billion valuation through 15 years of sustained deceit. We contribute to theory by demonstrating the dark side of stakeholder enrollment, where opportunism increases venture power over stakeholders, and deceit can endure long past start up. Keywords: stakeholder theory, stakeholder enrollment, entrepreneurial deceit, fear of missing out, legitimacy 2 The Effect of FOMO on Stakeholder Enrollment “Theranos had demonstrated a commitment to investing in and developing technologies that can make a difference in people’s lives, including for the severely wounded and ill. I had quickly seen tremendous potential in the technologies Theranos develops, and I have the greatest respect for the company’s mission and integrity.” (Johnson, 2015) — 4-star General Jim Mattis, U.S. Marine Corps, Retired U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2017-2019 The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged Silicon Valley-based private company Theranos Inc., its founder and CEO Elizabeth Holmes, and its former President Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani with raising more than $700 million from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud in which they exaggerated or made false statements about the company’s technology, business, and financial performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Theranos' Bad Blood
    Theranos’ Bad Blood In 2003, Stanford University student Elizabeth Holmes founded the health care company Theranos. The goal of the company was to revolutionize health care. Beginning with the goal of creating a patch to deliver drugs, the company instead shifted focus to developing a simple and effective method for blood diagnosis. Holmes dropped out of Stanford and began raising millions of dollars in funding. The company claimed that its technology could offer over 240 tests from just a prick of the finger. Test results could be delivered to a patient’s phone in hours, and a single test would cost less than half of the reimbursement rate of Medicare and Medicaid. Blood could be diagnosed easily without the need for many vials of blood drawn from patients’ veins or expensive lab work. By 2014, the company was valued at $9 billion, of which Holmes held a majority stake. Many investors backed the company based on the promise of the technology. Holmes received glowing profiles in news magazines, was featured on television shows, and presented keynote addresses at tech conferences. But the excitement of investors and the promise of the technology did not translate into success. Operating largely in a cloak of secrecy, the company could never validate its claims about its blood sampling technology, and many of its lab results went unchecked. In 2015, journalist John Carreyrou investigated the company for an article in The Wall Street Journal. He disclosed problems in the company’s equipment and testing methods. He found that the company did not even use its own technology in tests and often relied on older technology from other companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Company Lies
    Private Company Lies ELIZABETH POLLMAN* Rule 10b±5's antifraud catchall has been called one of the most conse- quential pieces of American administrative law and one of the most highly developed areas of judicially created federal law. Although the Rule broadly prohibits securities fraud in both public and private com- pany stock, the vast majority of jurisprudence, and the voluminous aca- demic literature that accompanies it, has developed through a public company lens. This Article illuminates how the explosive growth of private markets has left huge portions of U.S. capital markets with relatively light secur- ities fraud scrutiny and enforcement. Some of the largest private compa- nies by valuation grow in an environment of extreme information asymmetry and with the pressure, opportunity, and rationalizing culture that can foster misconduct and deception. Many investors in the private markets are sophisticated and can bear high levels of risk and signi®cant losses from securities fraud. It is increasingly evident, however, that pri- vate company lies can harm a broader range of shareholders and stake- holders as well as the ef®ciency of allocating billions of dollars for innovation and new business. In response to this underappreciated prob- lem, this Article explores a range of mechanisms to improve accountabil- ity in the private markets and ultimately argues for greater public oversight and enforcement. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 354 I. THE DEVELOPMENT OF RULE 10B±5 IN A
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 278E)
    Nominee Report | U.S. Office of Government Ethics; 5 C.F.R. part 2634 | Form Approved: OMB No. (3209-0001) (March 2014) Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report (OGE Form 278e) Filer's Information DeVos, Elisabeth P ("Betsy") Secretary, Department of Education Other Federal Government Positions Held During the Preceding 12 Months: Names of Congressional Committees Considering Nomination: ● Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Electronic Signature - I certify that the statements I have made in this form are true, complete and correct to the best of my knowledge. /s/ DeVos, Elisabeth P ("Betsy") [electronically signed on 01/19/2017 by DeVos, Elisabeth P ("Betsy") in Integrity.gov] Agency Ethics Official's Opinion - On the basis of information contained in this report, I conclude that the filer is in compliance with applicable laws and regulations (subject to any comments below). /s/ Goodridge-Keiller, Marcella, Certifying Official [electronically signed on 01/19/2017 by Goodridge-Keiller, Marcella in Integrity.gov] Other review conducted by /s/ Sprague, Marcia, Ethics Official [electronically signed on 01/19/2017 by Sprague, Marcia in Integrity.gov] U.S. Office of Government Ethics Certification /s/ Shaub, Walter M, Certifying Official [electronically signed on 01/19/2017 by Shaub, Walter M in Integrity.gov] 1. Filer's Positions Held Outside United States Government # ORGANIZATION NAME CITY, STATE ORGANIZATION POSITION HELD FROM TO TYPE 1 The Stow Company - Holland, Inc. See Endnote Holland, Corporation Chief Creative 5/2016 11/2016 Michigan Officer 2 The Stow Company - Holland, Inc. See Endnote Holland, Corporation Director 6/1994 11/2016 Michigan 3 RCB Main Floor, LLC (d/b/a "Reserve GR, See Endnote Grand Rapids, Corporation Director 3/2010 11/2016 LLC") Michigan 4 The Stow Company See Endnote Holland, Corporation Director 5/2010 11/2016 Michigan 5 Neurocore, LLC See Endnote Grand Rapids, Corporation Member/Manag 2/2009 11/2016 Michigan er 6 Windquest Group, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bleeding Edge: Theranos and the Growing Risk of an Unregulated Private Securities Market
    University of Miami Business Law Review Volume 28 Issue 2 Article 8 September 2020 The Bleeding Edge: Theranos and the Growing Risk of an Unregulated Private Securities Market Theodore O'Brien Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umblr Part of the Business Organizations Law Commons, and the Securities Law Commons Recommended Citation Theodore O'Brien, The Bleeding Edge: Theranos and the Growing Risk of an Unregulated Private Securities Market, 28 U. Miami Bus. L. Rev. 404 (2020) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umblr/vol28/iss2/8 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Business Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Bleeding Edge: Theranos and the Growing Risk of an Unregulated Private Securities Market Theodore O’Brien* America’s securities laws and regulations, most of which were created in the early twentieth century, are increasingly irrelevant to the most dynamic emerging companies. Today, companies with sufficient investor interest can raise ample capital through private and exempt offerings, all while eschewing the public exchanges and the associated burdens of the initial public offering, public disclosures, and regulatory scrutiny. Airbnb, Inc., for example, quickly tapped private investors for $1 billion in April of 2020,1 adding to the estimated $4.4 billion the company had previously raised.2 The fundamental shift from public to private companies is evidenced by the so-called “unicorns,” the more than 400 private companies valued at more than $1 billion.
    [Show full text]
  • Theranos Phenomenon – Part 5: Theranos’ Presentation at the American Association for Clinical Chemistry Annual Conference 2016
    Clin Chem Lab Med 2016; 54(10): e313–e314 Letter to the Editor Eleftherios P. Diamandis* and Mario Plebani Theranos phenomenon – Part 5: Theranos’ presentation at the American Association for Clinical Chemistry Annual Conference 2016 DOI 10.1515/cclm-2016-0737 Master, two highly recognized and respected clinical Accepted for publication August 18, 2016; previously published chemists, who did a good job in asking pertinent ques- online August 30, 2016 tions to Ms. Holmes and her associates. In this respect, AACC lived up to the expectations of high standards and Keywords: diagnostics; new technologies. impartiality for this presentation. Holmes presented to a large and curious, if not To the Editor, hostile, audience. She avoided talking about Theranos’ past and the difficulties of her company [1–7]. She also The widely anticipated presentation of Theranos at the made it clear that her presentation would focus on the Annual Conference of the American Association for future, not the past, and she distanced herself from the Clinical Chemistry (AACC) was finally given on Monday, previous “Edison” instrument and introduced a new August 1st, 2016 at the Philadelphia Convention Center. analyzer named “MiniLab”. In the first part of her pres- This journal has followed the Theranos story closely over entation, Ms. Holmes described the engineering behind the last 2 years and provided frequent updates [1–4]. Eliza- the MiniLab and explained that it is a compact desktop beth Holmes, the Chief Executive of Theranos, presented device that houses a mini spectrophotometer, a mini- to an audience of over 2500 clinical chemists and other luminometer, and mini-flow-cytometer and a mini-PCR laboratory scientists, as well as to an impressive number machine, along with a centrifuge.
    [Show full text]
  • ELIZABETH HOLMES and THERANOS, INC. 19 Defendants
    1 JINA L. CHOI (NY Bar No. 2699718) ERIN E. SCHNEIDER (Cal. Bar No. 216114) 2 [email protected] MONIQUE C. WINKLER (Cal. Bar No. 213031) 3 [email protected] JASON M. HABERMEYER (Cal. Bar No. 226607) 4 [email protected] MARC D. KATZ (Cal. Bar No. 189534) 5 [email protected] JESSICA W. CHAN (Cal. Bar No. 247669) 6 [email protected] RAHUL KOLHATKAR (Cal. Bar No. 261781) 7 [email protected] 8 Attorneys for Plaintiff SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 9 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2800 San Francisco, CA 94104 10 (415) 705-2500 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN JOSE DIVISION 14 15 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Case No. 16 Plaintiff, 17 COMPLAINT vs. 18 ELIZABETH HOLMES and THERANOS, INC. 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) alleges: 23 SUMMARY OF THE ACTION 24 1. This case involves the fraudulent offer and sale of securities by Theranos, Inc. 25 (“Theranos”), a California company that aimed to revolutionize the diagnostics industry, its 26 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Elizabeth Holmes, and its former President and Chief 27 Operating Officer, Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani. The Commission has filed a separate action 28 against Balwani. COMPLAINT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION SEC V .HOLMES, ET AL. -1- 44 MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 2800 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104 ǁ (415) 705-2500 1 2. Holmes, Balwani, and Theranos raised more than $700 million from late 2013 to 2 2015 while deceiving investors by making it appear as if Theranos had successfully developed a 3 commercially-ready portable blood analyzer that could perform a full range of laboratory tests 4 from a small sample of blood.
    [Show full text]
  • David Boies, Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 333
    Case4:11-cv-05236-YGR Document84 Filed07/17/12 Page1 of 26 1 David Boies, Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 2 333 Main Street Armonk, N.Y. 10504 3 Telephone: (914) 749-8200 Facsimile: (914) 749-8300 4 Email: [email protected] (admitted pro hac vice) 5 David W. Shapiro, Esq., SBN 219265 6 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 7 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874-1000 8 Facsimile: (510) 874-1460 Email: [email protected] 9 10 Counsel for Plaintiffs, 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 OAKLAND DIVISION 14 P L L 15 R CASE NO.: CV-11-5236-YGR E N X THERANOS, INC. and ELIZABETH E L F 16 HOLMES, & SECOND AMENDED R E L COMPLAINT AND L I 17 Plaintiffs, H C JURY DEMAND S , S E 18 v. I O B 19 FUISZ PHARMA LLC, RICHARD C. 20 FUISZ, and JOSEPH M. FUISZ, 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 25 Plaintiffs Theranos, Inc. (“Theranos”) and Elizabeth Holmes, by and 26 through their undersigned counsel, state, with knowledge of their own acts and 27 status and acts taking place in their presence, and upon information and belief as 28 to all other matters, as follows: 1 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Case No.: CV-11-05236-YGR Case4:11-cv-05236-YGR Document84 Filed07/17/12 Page2 of 26 1 Nature of the Action 2 1. This is an action for damages and equitable relief arising from the 3 wrongful conduct of Defendants Fuisz Pharma LLC, Richard C.
    [Show full text]
  • Bad Blood Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup by John Carreyrou
    Bad Blood Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup By John Carreyrou At its peak in 2013/14, Theranos had a valuation of $10 billion, representing incredible growth in the 10 years since its incorporation in 2003. The company claimed that it had developed and commercialized a revolutionary new blood testing solution. Viewed as a stunning start-up success, the Theranos board was a roster of well-known government and business leaders, including Henry Kissinger, James Mattis and Riley Bechtel. The buzz around Theranos was electric, and high-profile investors such as Betsey DeVos, the Walton family, and Rupert Murdoch invested hundreds of millions of dollars to fund the company. At the helm was Elizabeth Holmes, founder and CEO. Holmes dropped out of Stanford Engineering in 2004 and used her tuition fees to help fund her brainchild. Blond, attractive, and possessed of an unusually deep baritone voice, Holmes was listed by Forbes as one of America’s Richest Self-Made Women in 2015, with a net worth of over $4 billion. That same year, however, it all came crashing down when investigative reporter John Carreyrou of the Wall Street Journal revealed that the Theranos technology did not work as claimed. Carreyrou’s exhaustive research uncovered a web of lies and cover-ups, dating back to the earliest days at Theranos. Today, the company is worth nothing and has been dissolved, investors have lost multi- millions, and Elizabeth Holmes was charged with massive fraud by the SEC in March, 2018. This riches-to-rags story has captured the public’s imagination, and a movie based on Carreyrou’s book (starring Jennifer Lawrence as Elizabeth Holmes), is slated for release in 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Inovio Pharmaceuticals (INO) – Bad Blood the COVID-19 Version of Theranos – Target Price $1
    April 27, 2020 Inovio Pharmaceuticals (INO) – Bad Blood The COVID-19 Version of Theranos – Target Price $1 It was less than 10 years ago when Theranos was the talk of the med tech community as the mysterious startup claimed breakthrough advancements with the ability to quickly process over 240 laboratory tests with a prick of the finger. Seemed too good to be true? Well, as you know, the rest of the story is business history. Fast forward 10 years and we are now facing the largest global pandemic in generations. As the greatest scientific minds globally are working tirelessly to find a cure, Inovio Pharmaceuticals (INO) claims to have developed a vaccine in just 3 hours under the same scientific team that has spent decades deceiving investors. It’s been over 40 years since Inovio was founded, yet the company has NEVER brought a product to market, and all the while insiders have enriched themselves with hefty salaries and large stock sales. In this report, Citron will detail why Inovio shareholders have been “Theranosed” and why the SEC should immediately halt this blatant stock promotion. The Secret Algorithm Much like Theranos, Inovio claims to have a “secret sauce” that, miraculously, no pharma giant has been able to figure out. This is the same “secret sauce” that supposedly developed a vaccine for COVID-19 in just 3 hours. Simply put, the management team at Inovio is a group of charlatans. Just look at this exchange with 60 minutes and Inovio’s SVP of R&D Researcher Kate Broderick: Kate Broderick: All we need is that genetic code.
    [Show full text]