Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.
- Do you, or did you, own shares of Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ GS: SPPI )?
- Did you purchase your shares before August 8, 2012, or between August 8, 2012 and March 12, 2013, inclusive?
- Did you lose money in your investment in Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc.?
- Do you want to discuss your rights?
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Spectrum” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ GS: SPPI) between August 8, 2012 and March 12, 2013, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the “Complaint”).
If you purchased shares of Spectrum during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold Spectrum, and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to email@example.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/spectrum-pharmaceuticals-inc-sppi.
Spectrum is a biotechnology company with fully integrated commercial and drug development operations with a primary focus in hematology and oncology. In the United States, Spectrum primarily markets two oncology drugs, FUSILEV® (levoleucovorin) (“FUSILEV”) and ZEVALIN®. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company’s business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants concealed from the investing public that: (a) once the availability of leucovorin, a generic folate analog, increased, Spectrum’s sales of FUSILEV would plummet; (b) the purported advantages of FUSILEV over leucovorin would not be sufficient for clinics and hospitals to continue to opt for the more expensive FUSILEV once leucovorin was available in larger quantities; and (c) based upon the above, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its revenue and earnings during the Class Period. As a result of defendants’ false and misleading statements, the Company’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.