Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 3, 2023

Schoen v. Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.

Judge
Richard Seeborg
Docket
3:22-cv-06985
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
4
SecuritiesClass ActionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Schoen v. Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Judge Seeborg appointed Shane Skinner lead plaintiff and Levi & Korsinsky lead counsel, denying competing motions.

Who this affects

The proposed class members in the securities action, Shane Skinner, James Tomaiko, George Fareed, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, and the defendants are affected by the appointment and denial rulings. Skinner will serve as lead plaintiff, and Levi & Korsinsky, LLP will serve as lead counsel.

What happened

In Schoen v. Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, shareholders sought appointment as lead plaintiff in a proposed class action alleging that Eiger and related defendants made misleading statements about a drug candidate and regulatory efforts.

The court found that Shane Skinner had the largest claimed loss—about $282,523.90—and had adequately shown that his claims were typical of the class and that he would represent it responsibly. The other two applicants did not oppose Skinner’s appointment.

Judge Richard Seeborg appointed Skinner as lead plaintiff and Levi & Korsinsky, LLP as lead counsel. The court denied James Tomaiko’s and George Fareed’s competing motions.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Schoen v. Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc. · No. 3:22-cv-06985
Judge
Richard Seeborg
Date
Feb. 3, 2023

Background

Ronald A. Schoen filed a proposed class action against Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc., and individual defendants David A. Cory and Sriram Ryali. The complaint alleged that, between March 10, 2021, and October 4, 2022, Eiger made materially false or misleading statements about its business, operations, and compliance policies concerning peginterferon lambda and the TOGETHER study. The complaint asserted violations of the federal Securities Exchange Act.

Three proposed class members—Shane Skinner, James Tomaiko, and George Fareed—filed competing motions for appointment as lead plaintiff and for appointment of their respective attorneys as lead counsel. Tomaiko and Fareed later filed notices stating that they did not oppose Skinner’s appointment.

Legal standard

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act governs the appointment of a lead plaintiff in a securities class action. The court must generally select the class member with the largest financial interest who also meets the relevant requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, including typicality and adequacy. “Typicality” asks whether the proposed lead plaintiff’s claims resemble those of the class. “Adequacy” asks whether the person can fairly and vigorously represent the class. The lead plaintiff generally chooses lead counsel, subject to the court’s approval.

Court’s analysis

The court found that Skinner had suffered an approximately $282,523.90 loss, compared with $8,872.49 for Tomaiko and $7,713 for Fareed, using the applicants’ loss-based calculations. The court also found that Skinner made the required preliminary showing of typicality and adequacy. His claims concerned the same alleged misleading statements about peginterferon lambda and the TOGETHER study, and he submitted a declaration stating that he was motivated to litigate, would stay informed about important developments, and would act in the class’s best interests. Because no competing applicant opposed his appointment, the court held that the presumption favoring Skinner was not rebutted.

The court also found that Skinner’s chosen firm, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, appeared to have sufficient experience in securities actions, resources, and financial ability to serve as lead counsel.

Disposition

The court appointed Shane Skinner as lead plaintiff and Levi & Korsinsky, LLP as lead counsel. It denied the competing motions filed by James Tomaiko and George Fareed. This order addressed the representation of the proposed class; it did not decide the underlying allegations against Eiger or the other defendants. Judge Richard Seeborg signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.