United States v. Hernandez-Coplin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding scienter where executives’ public statements about FDA compliance were 15 contradicted by internal findings
• criticizing a party’s claim that an open-source journal was “peer-reviewed” when its “self- publish, fee-based, high-acceptance model is a substantial departure from the models used by other peer-reviewed journals”
• “When the FDA tells a company about problems with a product, and the company nonetheless continues to make confident predictions about a product, courts have inferred scienter and falsity.”
• “When the FDA tells a company about problems with a product, and the company nonetheless continues to make confident predictions about a product, courts have inferred scienter and falsity.”
• allegations gave rise to strong inference of scienter where, among other things, Defendants withheld important information already conveyed by the FDA and made statements that were allegedly “outright false” in light of the FDA’s activity
• “[W]hen the FDA tells a company about problems with a product, and the company nonetheless continues to make confident predictions about a product, courts have inferred scienter and falsity.” (quoting In re MannKind Sec. Actions, 835 F. Supp. 2d 797, 811 (C.D. Cal. 2011)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).