The law firm of Wohl & Fruchter LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Edwards Lifesciences Corp. (Edwards Lifesciences) (NYSE: EW) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed on October 24, 2013, in the United States District Court, Central District of California, and docketed under SACV13-1666-BRO-DFMx, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired securities of Edwards Lifesciences between April 25, 2012 and April 23, 2013, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). This class action seeks to recover damages against the Company and certain of its officers and directors as a result of alleged violations of the federal securities laws pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. If you are a shareholder who purchased EW shares during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff, you have until November 18, 2013 to seek appointment by the Court as lead plaintiff for the class. To discuss the case or learn more about becoming a lead plaintiff, please contact J. Elazar Fruchter at email@example.com, or call us toll free at 866.833.6245. A copy of the complaint filed by Wohl & Fruchter can be obtained at: http://www.wohlfruchter.com/cases/ew Edwards Lifesciences is a medical device maker that designs and markets, among other things, artificial heart valves for implantation in patients with advanced cardiovascular disease. The Company offers a range of such valves, including both valves that require traditional open-chest surgery, and its newer SAPIEN line of transcatheter heart valves ("THYs"), which may be implanted using a minimally invasive procedure. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose and/or misrepresented adverse facts, including that: (1) adoption of SAPIEN was weaker than the Company claimed due to concerns among physicians over the risks and complexity of the procedure for implanting the valve; (2) Edwards Lifesciences' outlook for sales and earnings per share ("EPS") was significantly weaker than the optimistic guidance Defendants offered to investors; and (3) as a result, Defendants lacked a reasonable basis for the statements made concerning the Company's operations, forecasts, and outlook.