Lawsuit Overview
September 6, 2017 - The case was voluntarily dismissed.
July 3, 2017 (Shareholders Foundation) - An investor in shares of Sinovac Biotech Ltd, NASDAQ:SVA) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Sinovac Biotech Ltd in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between April 30, 2013 and May 16, 2017.
According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Sinovac Biotech Ltd, NASDAQ:SVA) common shares between April 30, 2013 and May 16, 2017, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws. More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between April 30, 2013 and May 16, 2017, the defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Defendant Weidong Yin, Sinovac’s Chairman and CEO, bribed a member of the Chinese Food and Drug Administration to assist Sinovac’s vaccine clinical trial and approval, that such conduct would subject Sinovac to heightened regulatory scrutiny, and that as a result, Sinovac’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
China based Sinovac Biotech Ltd.is a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the research, development, manufacturing and commercialization of vaccines that protect against human infectious diseases. Sinovac Biotech Ltd. reported that its annual Total Revenue rose from $62.93 million in 2014 to $67.41 million in 2015 and that its Net Loss increased from $0.85 million in 2014 to $1.07 million in 2015.
On December 21, 2016, a report was published disclosing that Sinovac’s Chairman and CEO, Weidong Ying, had allegedly paid bribes to Yin Hongzhang, the Deputy Director General of the Center for Drug Evaluation for the China Food and Drug Administration, to help procure and pass drug applications and evaluations.
On May 16, 2017, Sinovac Biotech Ltd. disclosed that the SEC staff is conducting an enforcement inquiry related to the matters discussed in the article and that the SEC staff subsequently issued a subpoena requesting documents related to the internal investigation.