Immunovant, Inc

On September 29, 2019, HSAC entered into an agreement with Immunovant Sciences Ltd. (“Legacy Immunovant”) to effect a merger between the two entities (the “Merger”). 

Immunovant is developing IMVT-1401, a novel fully human monoclonal antibody, which is Phase IIa clinical trials for the treatment of myasthenia gravis (“MG”) and thyroid eye disease (“TED”). The Company has also completed initiation of Phase II clinical trials of IMVT-1401 for the treatment of warm autoimmune hemolytic anemia (“WAIHA”).

On February 2, 2021, the Company issued a press release “announc[ing] a voluntary pause of dosing in its ongoing clinical trials for IMVT-1401.” The Company also disclosed that it “has become aware of a physiological signal consisting of elevated total cholesterol and LDL [low-density lipoproteins] levels in IMVT-1401-treated patients” and “[o]ut of an abundance of caution, the Company has decided to voluntarily pause dosing in ongoing clinical studies in both TED and in [WAIHA], in order to inform patients, investigators, and regulators as well as to modify the monitoring program.” 

On this news, the Company’s stock price fell $18.22 per share, or 42.08%, to close at $25.08 per share on February 2, 2021, thereby injuring investors. 

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially 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 to investors that: (1) HSAC had performed inadequate due diligence into Legacy Immunovant prior to the Merger, and/or ignored or failed to disclose safety issues associated with IMVT-1401; (2) IMVT-1401 was less safe than the Company had led investors to believe, particularly with respect to treating TED and WAIHA; (3) the foregoing foreseeably diminished IMVT-1401's prospects for regulatory approval, commercial viability, and profitability; and (4) as a result, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.