March 2, 2021 - The case was voluntarily dismissed.

January 26, 2021 - The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs were given leave to amend the complaint.

April 10, 2020 - A motion to dismiss the amended complaint was filed.

January 24, 2020 - An amended complaint was filed.

August 19, 2019 - An investor in shares of Nektar Therapeutics (NASDAQ: NKTR) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Nektar Therapeutics in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between February 15, 2019 and August 8, 2019.

San Francisco, CA based Nektar Therapeutics develops drug candidates for cancer, auto-immune disease, and chronic pain in the United States. Nektar Therapeutics reported that its annual Total Revenue rose from $307.71 million in 2017 to over $1.19 billion in 2018 and that its Net Loss of $96.69 million in 2017 turned into a Net Income of $681.31 million in 2018. Shares of Nektar Therapeutics (NASDAQ: NKTR) grew from $11.94 per share in early 2017 to as high as $109.32 per share on March 2018.

On August 8, 2019, after-market hours, Nektar Therapeutics announced that a manufacturing issue caused two out of the twenty batches of bempegaldesleukin to differ from the production line. These faulty batches resulted in variable clinical benefit than other batches used in its PIVOT-02 clinical trial. Shares of Nektar Therapeutics (NASDAQ: NKTR) declined to as low as $17.30 per share on August 14, 2019. On August 19, 2019, NASDAQ: NKTR shares close at $17.87 per share.

According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Nektar Therapeutics (NASDAQ: NKTR) common shares between February 15, 2019 and August 8, 2019, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws.

More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between February 15, 2019 and August 8, 2019, the Defendants failed to disclose to investors, that the Company did not comply with current good manufacturing practices, that, as a result, batches of NKTR-214 were not produced consistently and differed meaningfully, that clinical results from PIVOT-02 differed based on the batch of NKTR-214 used in the study, that, as a result, the PIVOT-02 study did not produce statistically significant results to support a finding of clinical benefit, and that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.