Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. Amgen Inc.

Background

The complaint in this proposed class action alleges that Amgen Inc. and two senior executives defrauded members of the public who purchased Amgen common stock. The law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP represented both the named plaintiff, Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund, and the Asbestos Workers Philadelphia Pension Fund (the “Asbestos Fund”).

After notice of the action, two entities sought appointment as lead plaintiff under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: the Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 60 Pension Trust (“Local 60”), which also proposed Labaton Sucharow LLP as lead counsel, and the Asbestos Fund, which proposed Robbins Geller as lead counsel. Local 60 later withdrew its motion, leaving the Asbestos Fund’s motion unopposed.

Court’s analysis

The Securities Exchange Act requires the court to appoint the class member most capable of adequately representing the class as lead plaintiff. The statute creates a presumption in favor of the applicant who timely sought appointment, has the largest financial interest in the relief sought, and satisfies the relevant requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.

The court found that the Asbestos Fund met those requirements. It had filed a timely motion. After Local 60 withdrew, the Asbestos Fund was the only remaining applicant and therefore had the largest financial interest among the applicants. The court also noted that the Asbestos Fund claimed losses of $108,400, while Local 60 had claimed $54,806 before withdrawing its motion.

The court further found that the Asbestos Fund satisfied Rule 23’s requirements that a representative’s claims be typical of the class and that the representative fairly and adequately protect the class’s interests. The Asbestos Fund alleged that, like other proposed class members, it bought Amgen common stock at a price inflated by the defendants’ alleged misrepresentations and suffered losses when the stock’s value declined. The court found no conflict between the Asbestos Fund and other class members, determined that the fund’s alleged losses provided sufficient interest in the case, and found Robbins Geller experienced in securities class actions.

Lead counsel

The statute allows the most adequate plaintiff to select lead counsel, subject to court approval. The court reviewed Robbins Geller’s experience representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and approved the Asbestos Fund’s selection of the firm as lead counsel.

Disposition

The court granted the Asbestos Fund’s unopposed motion. It appointed the Asbestos Fund as Lead Plaintiff and Robbins Geller as Lead Counsel, directed the clerk to close the motions at Docket Numbers 16 and 20, and ordered the Lead Plaintiff and defendants to jointly propose by July 21, 2023, a schedule for a possible amended complaint and the defendants’ response.