Cody et al. v. ConforMIS, Inc. et al

Track this case

Case Number:

1:15-cv-13295

Court:

Massachusetts

Nature of Suit:

Securities/Commodities

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action

Judge:

George A. OToole, Jr

Firms

Companies

Sectors & Industries:

  1. August 03, 2016

    Judge Tosses Investors' Suit Over $140M ConforMIS IPO

    In a tartly worded opinion, a Massachusetts judge ruled Wednesday that "lack of clairvoyance is not actionable" in tossing a proposed class action that claimed artificial joint maker ConforMIS Inc. misled investors about manufacturing issues ahead of its $140 million initial public offering.

  2. April 18, 2016

    ConforMIS Investors Fight Bid To Toss Suit Over $140M IPO

    A proposed class of investors in ConforMIS Inc. asked a Massachusetts federal court Friday not to toss their suit claiming the artificial joint maker misled investors about manufacturing issues ahead of its $140 million initial public offering in July, saying a prospectus glossed over clear quality control deficiencies that led to a costly recall.

  3. March 21, 2016

    ConforMIS Moves To Toss Suit Over $140M IPO

    Artificial joint maker ConforMIS Inc. urged a Massachusetts federal court on Friday to dismiss a putative investor class action accusing the company of hiding problems with its knee joint replacement systems in advance of its $140 million initial public offering.

  4. November 12, 2015

    Pomerantz Named Lead Counsel In $121M ConforMIS IPO Suit

    A Massachusetts federal judge on Tuesday approved Pomerantz LLP as lead counsel and Block & Leviton LLP as liaison counsel for a putative investor class accusing artificial-joint maker ConforMIS Inc. of hiding problems with its knee joint replacement systems ahead of its $121 million initial public offering.

  5. September 04, 2015

    Artificial Joint Co. Hid Issues Before $121M IPO, Suit Claims

    Private equity-backed artificial joint maker ConforMIS Inc. hid problems with its knee joint replacement systems in advance of its $121 million initial public offering, failing to disclose the manufacturing defect until it issued a recall months later, shareholders have claimed in a proposed class action.