UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
ALBERT BRODZINSKY AND EVELYN BRODZINSKY,
Plaintiffs,
v.
FRONTPOINT PARTNERS LLC, YVES BENHAMOU, JOSEPH F. “CHIP” SKOWRON III, FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FLAGSHIP FUND, L.P. f/k/a FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FUND, L.P., FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE HORIZONS FUND, L.P., FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE I FUND, L.P., FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FLAGSHIP ENHANCED FUND, L.P. f/k/a FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FUND 2X, L.P., FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE LONG HORIZONS FUND, L.P., FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE CENTENNIAL FUND, L.P., FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FLAGSHIP FUND GP, LLC f/k/a FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FUND GP, LLC, FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE HORIZONS FUND GP, LLC, FRONTPOINT UNIVERSAL GP, LLC, FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FLAGSHIP ENHANCED FUND GP, LLC f/k/a FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE FUND 2X GP, LLC, FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE LONG HORIZONS FUND GP, LLC, FRONTPOINT HEALTHCARE CENTENNIAL FUND GP, LLC,
Defendants.
DOCKET NO. 3:11-cv-00010-WWE
September 19, 2011
SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 1 of 51
1
Plaintiffs Albert Brodzinsky and Evelyn Brodzinksy (“Plaintiffs”), based on the
investigation of their counsel, which included the review of public filings of the United States
Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”), allege on information and belief as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. Over a six-week period in December 2007 and January 2008, Defendant Joseph F.
“Chip” Skowron III, M.D., PhD. (“Skowron”), a former portfolio manager for six healthcare-
related hedge funds affiliated with and managed by Defendant FrontPoint Partners LLC
(“FrontPoint”), sold approximately six million shares of Human Genome Sciences, Inc.
(“HGSI”) common stock for the funds while in possession of material negative non-public
information concerning HGSI’s clinical trial for the drug Albumin Interferon Alfa 2-a
(“Albuferon”). The six healthcare-related hedge funds are Defendants FrontPoint Healthcare
Flagship Fund, L.P. f/k/a FrontPoint Healthcare Fund, L.P., FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons
Fund, L.P., FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P., FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund,
L.P. f/k/a FrontPoint Healthcare Fund 2X, L.P., FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund,
L.P., and FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P. (collectively “Hedge Fund Defendants”).
The six investment advisors to the Hedge Fund Defendants are FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship
Fund GP, LLC f/k/a FrontPoint Healthcare Fund GP, LLC, FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund
GP, LLC, FrontPoint Universal GP, LLC, FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund GP,
LLC f/k/a FrontPoint Healthcare Fund 2X GP, LLC, FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund
GP, LLC, and FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund GP, LLC (collectively “Investment
Advisor Defendants”).
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 2 of 51
2
2. Skowron’s material negative non-public information came from Defendant Yves
Benhamou, M.D. (“Benhamou”). Benhamou was one of five members of a steering committee
(“Steering Committee”) overseeing the Albuferon trial. At the same time, he worked for an
expert networking firm Guidepoint Global, LLC (“Guidepoint Global”) and consulted with
Skowron, the Investment Advisor Defendants and the Hedge Fund Defendants on multiple
occasions since in or about March 2006. Beginning in or about April 2007, Skowron and
Benhamou oftentimes circumvented Guidepoint Global by directly dealing with each other
independently of the firm.
3. Commencing in November 2007, and on multiple occasions prior to January 23,
2008, Benhamou learned material negative non-public information about Phase 3 of the
Albuferon trial that had negative implications for Albuferon’s future commercial potential. In
breach of his obligations to HGSI as a Steering Committee member and investigative physician
for the clinical trial, Benhamou communicated such information to Skowron, and hence to the
Investment Advisor Defendants and the Hedge Fund Defendants, for Benhamou’s own benefit,
including: (i) the receipt of financial benefits such as payments of cash and other expenses, (ii)
the development of trust and confidence with Skowron, and (iii) the development of a potential
future business relationship.
4. Skowron knew that Benhamou participated in the Albuferon trial and served on
the trial’s Steering Committee as an investigative physician. He also knew or should have
known based on his experience, as well as his employers’ policies, that Benhamou had an
obligation not to disclose confidential information about the trial. Nonetheless, immediately
upon receiving material negative non-public information from Benhamou about the Albuferon
trial, Skowron took action to sell the Hedge Fund Defendants’ holdings of HGSI common stock.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 3 of 51
3
On key dates prior to HGSI’s announcement of negative news concerning the trial, including
minutes before the close of the markets on January 22, 2008, Skowron, acting under the authority
delegated to him by FrontPoint, caused the Investment Advisor Defendants to cause the Hedge
Fund Defendants to sell all of their remaining holdings of HGSI common stock.
5. On January 23, 2008, HGSI publicly announced that all patients who had been
administered a higher dosage level of Albuferon in its clinical trial would be moved to a lower
dosage level due to a safety issue detected during Phase 3 of the trial. The higher dosage level
was believed, until then, to have greater commercial potential than the lower dosage. In response
to HGSI’s announcement, the market price of HGSI’s common stock fell by approximately 44
percent, to $5.62 a share by the close of the markets that day.
6. Overall, the six Hedge Fund Defendants sold more than six million shares of
HGSI common stock – representing all of their holdings – thereby avoiding at least $30 million
in losses. After HGSI made its January 23, 2008 public announcement regarding Albuferon, as
the price of HGSI stock declined, the Hedge Fund Defendants went back into the market and re-
purchased 1.5 million more shares of HGSI common stock, at reduced prices. These shares
purchased on January 23, 2008 were sold at a profit between January 24 and 31, 2008.
7. Skowron later attempted to cover up his conduct. Among other things, in
February 2008, after the SEC informed FrontPoint’s counsel that it was investigating the Hedge
Fund Defendants’ January 22, 2008 block trade of HGSI stock, FrontPoint’s counsel scheduled
Skowron’s interview with the SEC. Skowron then contacted Benhamou, informed him of the
SEC’s investigation, and informed him that FrontPoint’s counsel wanted to interview Benhamou.
Skowron encouraged Benhamou to deceive FrontPoint’s counsel by falsely telling them that
Skowron and Benhamou had not discussed non-public information about the Albuferon trial but
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 4 of 51
4
had only discussed the “basket of drugs” relating to the treatment of hepatitis C and other
diseases of the liver. Benhamou acquiesced. Later, in April 2008, while in Milan, Italy for a
liver conference, Skowron made a cash payment to Benhamou, after a failed prior attempt to do
so in Boston, Massachusetts in February 2008. Similarly, when Benhamou told Skowron he no
longer could afford counsel during the SEC’s investigation, Skowron offered to pay the fees of
the French law firm which then represented Benhamou.
8. By this conduct, all of the Defendants violated the antifraud provisions of the
federal securities laws, including Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule l0b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R § 240]. All of the
Defendants are also liable under Section 20A of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t-1], due to
their unlawful insider trading actions. In addition, FrontPoint, the Investment Advisor
Defendants and Skowron are liable under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(a)]
as “controlling persons” of the Hedge Fund Defendants.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
9. The claims alleged herein arise under Sections 10(b), 10b-5, 20A, and 20(a) of the
Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78t-1, 78t(a), and 17 C.F.R. § 240. Jurisdiction and venue
are proper pursuant to Section 27 of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa. Certain of the acts,
practices, transactions, and courses of business constituting the violations alleged herein
occurred within this judicial district.
THE PARTIES
PLAINTIFFS
10. Albert Brodzinsky and Evelyn Brodzinsky are individuals residing in
Maryland. As detailed in the attached Schedule A, Mr. and Mrs. Brodzinsky bought 1,000
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 5 of 51
5
shares of HGSI at $11.3299 on January 3, 2008, contemporaneous with the Hedge Fund
Defendants’ sales of HGSI common stock while in possession of material negative non-public
information. Mr. and Mrs. Brodzinsky also paid a commission of $9.99 for a total transaction
cost of $11,339.89.
DEFENDANTS
11. Yves Benhamou, M.D., age 50, is a citizen and resident of France. He is a
medical doctor who is widely known in medical communities in Europe and the United States as
an expert in the treatment of hepatitis C and other diseases of the liver. In fact, on or about
August 11, 2009, during testimony to the SEC, Skowron described Benhamou as a “thought
leader in the area of [h]epatitis” with whom he would have spoken about Albuferon. Throughout
the period covered by this Complaint, Benhamou was the Chief of Department, Clinical
Research in Hepatology, Hôpitaux de Paris-Pitié-Salpétrière and an Associate Professor of
Hepatology at the Hôpitaux de Paris-Pitié-Salpétrière in Paris, France. He was also a clinical
investigative physician for HGSI and was involved with the clinical trial for Albuferon in two
capacities, as: (i) a member of the Steering Committee that oversaw Phase 3 of the trial and (ii)
an investigative physician and “country lead” for France and other parts of Europe during Phase
2b and 3 of the trial. By virtue of his role in the clinical trial, and in accordance with the terms of
his contract with HGSI, Benhamou owed HGSI a duty to hold in strict confidence all information
learned in connection with his participation in the HGSI clinical trial and to use such information
only for the benefit of HGSI. In addition, from approximately March 2006, Benhamou had an
exclusive consulting agreement with Guidepoint Global, the expert networking firm that paid
Benhamou to consult with its clients, such as FrontPoint and its portfolio managers, including
Skowron. Benhamou also warranted, as part of his agreement with Guidepoint Global, that he
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 6 of 51
6
would not disclose any confidential information (including confidential information learned from
clinical trials) to the firm or its consulting clients. On April 11, 2011, Benhamou pled guilty,
pursuant to a cooperation agreement with the United States, to four-count Information charging
him with conspiracy to commit securities fraud, securities fraud, conspiracy to obstruct justice,
and making false statements, all in connection with the insider trading scheme involving HGSI
securities described herein.
12. Joseph F. “Chip” Skowron III, M.D., PhD., age 41, resides in Greenwich,
Connecticut. Skowron is a medical doctor who, throughout the period covered by this
Complaint, was a Managing Director of Morgan Stanley, an executive officer of the six
Investment Advisor Defendants, and a co-portfolio manager of the six Hedge Fund Defendants.
FrontPoint hired Skowron, a doctor by training, in 2003 to manage investments in healthcare
stocks. Skowron shared responsibility for FrontPoint’s investment decisions primarily with two
co-portfolio managers, Co-Portfolio Manager 2 and Co-Portfolio Manager 3. Between Skowron,
Co-Portfolio Manager 2, and Co-Portfolio Manager 3, Skowron was primarily responsible for,
among other things, the Hedge Fund Defendants’ investment decisions related to public
companies involved in the development of drugs intended to treat hepatitis C. Skowron worked
in the Connecticut and New York offices of Morgan Stanley and FrontPoint. Skowron was put
on administrative leave from FrontPoint on or about November 2, 2010, and was ultimately
terminated. Skowron’s compensation in 2007 and 2008 was linked to the performance of the
hedge funds that he managed for FrontPoint and the fees earned by the funds’ investment
advisor/management company.
(a) Throughout his employment at Morgan Stanley, Skowron was aware of and
understood that Morgan Stanley’s Code of Conduct and FrontPoint’s Trading Policy and Code of
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 7 of 51
7
Ethics (“Trading Policy”) prohibited him from trading, personally or on behalf of clients, on the
basis of material non-public information or communicating material non-public information to
others. Indeed, during the six-week period in which he traded on material non-public
information about the Albuferon trial, Skowron even signed a statement acknowledging that he
understood the FrontPoint Trading Policy and updates thereto.
(b) Among other things, the Trading Policy prohibited Skowron from engaging in
insider trading by “trading either personally or on behalf of clients or others, on the basis of
material non-public information or communicating material non-public information to others in
violation of the law.” The Trading Policy also informed Skowron that a consultant who has a
confidential relationship with a company may be a “temporary insider” and that “non-insiders”
can acquire the fiduciary responsibilities of insiders as “tippees” if “they are aware or should
have been aware that they have been given confidential information by a shareholder who has
violated his fiduciary duty to the company’s shareholders.” Skowron was also informed by the
Trading Policy that, “[u]nder the ‘misappropriation’ theory [of insider trading], liability is
established when trading occurs on material non-public information that is stolen or
misappropriated from any other person.”
13. FrontPoint Partners LLC is a hedge fund sponsor which, at all times relevant to
this Complaint, was an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Morgan Stanley and is directly, or
through the Investment Advisor Defendants, the investment advisor to the six Hedge Fund
Defendants. It is based in Greenwich, Connecticut with additional offices in New York and
London. FrontPoint is a registered investment advisor under the U.S. Investment Advisers Act
of 1940. On or about November 2, 2010, FrontPoint placed Skowron on administrative leave.
FrontPoint ultimately terminated Skowron’s employment.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 8 of 51
8
14. FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P. (f/k/a/ FrontPoint Healthcare
Fund, L.P.) was a Delaware limited partnership whose stated investment strategy was to take
long and short positions primarily in equity securities of healthcare and healthcare-related
companies predominantly in the United States. Skowron was, at all times covered by this
Complaint, a co-portfolio manager of this fund. In his capacity as an executive officer of the
fund’s general partner, Skowron had discretionary authority to select trades and determine the
allocation of the fund’s investments.
15. FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P. was a Delaware limited
partnership whose stated investment strategy was to take long and short positions primarily in
equity securities of healthcare and healthcare-related companies predominantly in the United
States. The FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P. sought to have a longer investment
horizon than the FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P. Skowron was, at all times relevant
to this Complaint, a co-portfolio manager of this fund. In his capacity as an executive officer of
the fund’s general partner, Skowron had discretionary authority to select trades and determine
the allocation of the fund’s investments. Skowron was also a limited partner and personally
invested in this fund.
16. FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P. was a Delaware limited partnership whose
stated investment strategy was to take long and short positions primarily in equity securities of
healthcare and healthcare-related companies predominantly in the United States. The FrontPoint
Healthcare I Fund, L.P. had a similar horizon and strategy to the FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship
Fund, L.P. except it contained assets subject to the fiduciary provisions of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). Skowron was, at all times relevant to this
Complaint, a co-portfolio manager of this fund. In his capacity as an executive officer of the
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 9 of 51
9
fund’s general partner, Skowron had discretionary authority to select trades and determine the
allocation of the fund’s investments.
17. FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P. (f/k/a/ FrontPoint
Healthcare Fund 2X, L.P.) was a Cayman Islands exempted limited partnership whose stated
investment strategy was to take long and short positions primarily in equity securities of
healthcare and healthcare-related companies predominantly in the United States. The FrontPoint
Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P. sought to replace the portfolio of the FrontPoint
Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P., but employed substantially more leverage to target a gross
exposure and net exposure that is two times that of the FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund,
L.P. at the beginning of each month. Skowron was, at all times covered by this Complaint, a co-
portfolio manager of this fund. In his capacity as an executive officer of the fund’s general
partner, Skowron had discretionary authority to select trades and determine the allocation of the
fund’s investments. Skowron was also personally invested in this fund through its onshore
feeder fund, FrontPoint Onshore Healthcare Fund 2X, L.P., of which he was a limited partner.
18. FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P. was a Cayman Islands
exempted limited partnership whose stated investment strategy was to take long and short
positions primarily in equity securities of healthcare and healthcare-related companies
predominantly in the United States. The FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P.
sought to employ the same investment process and approach as the FrontPoint Healthcare
Horizons Fund, L.P. but to have a longer investment horizon and greater variability in its net
exposure to the market over time. Skowron was, at all times relevant to this Complaint, a co-
portfolio manager of this fund, and in his capacity as an executive officer of the fund’s general
partner, Skowron had discretionary authority to select trades and determine the allocation of the
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 10 of 51
10
fund’s investments. Skowron was also personally invested in this fund through its onshore
feeder fund, FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Onshore Fund, L.P., of which he was a
limited partner.
19. FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P. was a Cayman Islands exempted
limited partnership whose stated investment strategy was to take long and short positions
primarily in equity securities of healthcare and healthcare-related companies predominantly in
the United States. Skowron was, at all times covered by this Complaint, a co-portfolio manager
of this fund. In his capacity as an executive officer of the fund’s general partner, Skowron had
discretionary authority to select trades and determine the allocation of the fund’s investments.
20. FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund GP, LLC (f/k/a FrontPoint Healthcare
Fund GP, LLC), a Delaware limited liability company affiliated with FrontPoint, was the
General Partner of and provided investment advice and management services to the FrontPoint
Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P. Skowron was an executive officer of this company.
21. FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company affiliated with FrontPoint, was the General Partner of and provided investment advice
and management services to the FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P. Skowron was an
executive officer of this company.
22. FrontPoint Universal GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company affiliated
with FrontPoint, was the General Partner of and provided investment advice and management
services to the FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P. Skowron was an executive officer of this
company.
23. FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund GP, LLC (f/k/a FrontPoint
Healthcare Fund 2X GP, LLC), a Delaware limited liability company affiliated with
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 11 of 51
11
FrontPoint, was the General Partner of and provided investment advice and management services
to the FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P. Skowron was an executive officer of
this company.
24. FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund GP, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company affiliated with FrontPoint, was the General Partner of and provided investment
advice and management services to the FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P.
Skowron was an executive officer of this company.
25. FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company affiliated with FrontPoint, was the General Partner of and provided investment advice
and management services to the FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P. Skowron was an
executive officer of this company.
OTHER RELEVANT PERSONS AND ENTITIES
26. Human Genome Sciences, Inc. (“HGSI”) is a biopharmaceutical company that
is incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in Rockville, Maryland. HGSI’s common stock
is registered with the SEC pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(b) and quoted on the NASDAQ
Global Market under the ticker symbol HGSI. HGSI is not a defendant in this action and
Plaintiffs make no allegation herein of any wrongdoing by HGSI.
27. Co-Portfolio Managers 2 and 3 were, throughout the period covered by this
Complaint, Managing Directors of Morgan Stanley and members of the FrontPoint healthcare
investment team. Co-Portfolio Managers 2 and 3 worked principally out of FrontPoint’s New
York offices and were, with Skowron, co-portfolio managers of the six Hedge Fund Defendants.
Skowron and Co-Portfolio Managers 2 and 3 shared responsibility for the funds’ investment
decisions. A fourth co-portfolio manager shared responsibility for investment decisions for two
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 12 of 51
12
of the funds. Between the co-portfolio managers, Skowron had primarily responsibility for,
among other things, the funds’ investment decisions relating to companies involved in the
development of drugs intended to treat hepatitis C. The approval of only one co-portfolio
manager was needed to reduce risk in the funds’ portfolios; the approval of two co-portfolio
managers was needed to increase risk in the funds’ portfolios. Upon information and belief,
either Dr. Jason Bonadio, Ajay Bhalla and/or Kevin Caliendo are Co-Portfolio Managers 2 and
3. Plaintiffs do not currently know which individual is Co-Portfolio Manager 2 or Co-Portfolio
Manager 3.
28. FrontPoint Trader is a trader for FrontPoint who, during the relevant time
period, accepted trade orders from the portfolio managers and submitted trades for the Hedge
Fund Defendants through various broker-dealers.
FACTS
I. HGSI’s Expectations for Phase 3 Of The Achieve Trial
29. In or about August 2007, HGSI began conducting a Phase 3 (late-stage
development) clinical trial to test the safety and efficacy of Albuferon, a drug to treat the liver
disease hepatitis C (hereinafter, the “Achieve Trial”). Albuferon is the commercial name for a
long-acting form of interferon alpha, a drug HGSI developed for the treatment of hepatitis C. In
June 2006, HGSI and Novartis entered into an agreement for the clinical development and
commercialization of Albuferon for the treatment of hepatitis C. In October 2006, HGSI
anticipated revenue of as much as approximately $500 million related to its agreement with
Novartis for Albuferon.
30. The Achieve Trial was administered to over 2,250 patients worldwide, in three
arms: (1) a 900-microgram dose of Albuferon, given once every two weeks; (2) a 1,200-
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 13 of 51
13
microgram dose of Albuferon, given once every two weeks; and (3) the standard (180-
microgram) dose of Pegasys, the then-leading hepatitis C drug on the market, given once a week.
31. At the 58th Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver
Diseases held in Boston, Massachusetts from November 2 to November 6, 2007 (“2007 AASLD
Conference”), HGSI announced that, if Phase 3 confirmed the findings from Phase 2, HGSI
expected to demonstrate that: (i) the 900-microgram dose of Albuferon was just as effective as
the standard dose of Pegasys, (ii) the 1,200-microgram dose was more effective than the standard
dose of Pegasys, and (iii) both doses of Albuferon improved the quality of life for patients
compared to Pegasys.
32. Throughout Phase 3, HGSI publicly stated its expectation that, if its Phase 3 trial
confirmed the findings of Phase 2, Albuferon could become the “interferon of choice” for the
treatment of hepatitis C. HGSI believed Albuferon had tremendous commercial potential.
II. The Hedge Fund Defendants Acquired Positions In HGSI Throughout 2007 Based On A Belief That The Stock Did Not Fully Reflect The Value of Albuferon 33. From February 1, 2007 through December 3, 2007, the Hedge Fund Defendants
purchased approximately 6.2 million shares of HGSI at an average price of $10.32 per share.
From in or about February 2007 through at least January 2008, Benhamou served on the Steering
Committee of the Achieve Trial.
34. At the time, the investment thesis or rationale for the Hedge Fund Defendants to
own HGSI common stock was the co-portfolio managers’ belief that the stock price was
undervalued and did not fully reflect the competitive opportunities presented by Albuferon. The
co-portfolio managers established an internal price target for HGSI shares of $17 per share.
35. At the close of the market on December 3, 2007, the Hedge Fund Defendants
collectively owned 6,164,500 shares of HGSI, which were allocated among the funds as follows:
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 14 of 51
14
Hedge Fund Defendant
HGSI Shares Held on Dec. 3, 2007
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P.
1,872,900
FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P.
1,802,400
FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P.
193,900
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P.
1,379,600
FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P.
760,400
FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P.
155,300
Total 6,164,500
III. Skowron Set the Stage for Getting Insider Information From Benhamou By Luring Him With Money
36. Throughout the time that Hedge Fund Defendants were investing in HGSI stock,
and earlier, Skowron was cultivating a relationship with Benhamou that ultimately led to
Benhamou sharing with Skowron material non-public information about the Albuferon trial.
37. From in or about March 2006 through at least in or about 2008, Benhamou had an
exclusive consulting agreement with Guidepoint Global, a Manhattan-based expert networking
firm that paid Benhamou to consult with its clients, such as FrontPoint and its portfolio
managers, including Skowron.
38. On or about April 1, 2006, FrontPoint entered into a services agreement with
Guidepoint Global. In that agreement, FrontPoint agreed not to seek out any non-public
information or confidential information concerning any company from Guidepoint Global’s
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 15 of 51
15
expert consultants. Guidepoint Global also required FrontPoint to warrant that it was complying
with United States securities laws in connection with any information provided to it and that
FrontPoint would not enter into separate agreements with Guidepoint Global’s expert
consultants, such as Benhamou. On or about April 1, 2007, FrontPoint and Guidepoint Global
extended the services agreement for an additional year.
39. FrontPoint paid approximately $900,000.00 in annual fees to Guidepoint Global
in order for Skowron and others at FrontPoint to consult with the firm’s medical experts,
including Benhamou.
40. Skowron used the services of Guidepoint Global to arrange telephone
conversations and meetings with Benhamou at various times, including at medical conferences at
which Benhamou’s participation in HGSI’s clinical drug trials of Albuferon was publicly
disclosed.
41. On April 29, 2006, Skowron and Benhamou met for the first time after a group
meeting hosted by Guidepoint Global at the 41st Annual Meeting of the European Association
for the Study of the Liver (“EASL 2006 Conference”). At the conference, there was an oral
presentation of an Albuferon clinical trial report, co-authored by Benhamou, about the interim
results of Phase 2b of the Albuferon clinical trial. HGSI publicized the presentation of these
results through press releases issued on or about March 14 and May 1, 2006. Both press releases
cited Benhamou as a co-author of the presentation.
42. Similarly, on or about October 27, 2006, Skowron and Benhamou had another
meeting at the annual conference of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases
(“AASDL 2006 Conference”) in Boston, Massachusetts. In advance of the conference, the
AASLD published abstracts of the clinical drug trial results to be published at the conference.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 16 of 51
16
Among these published abstracts were two Albuferon clinical trial studies co-authored by
Benhamou. Both abstracts disclosed that Benhamou was an “investigator” for HGSI. On or
about October 31, 2006, HGSI publicized these results through a press release.
43. On or about February 27 and April 14, 2007, HGSI issued press releases about the
presentation and publication of Albuferon clinical trial results, which named Benhamou as a co-
author. An oral presentation of the data was made at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the European
Association for the Study of Liver (“EASL 2007 Conference”) in Barcelona, Spain.
44. At the EASL 2007 Conference on April 12, 2007, Benhamou met Skowron at
Skowron’s hotel for a one-on-one consultation that had been arranged through Guidepoint
Global, after which the two were to continue to dinner with a representative of Guidepoint
Global. On or about February 27 and April 14, 2007, HGSI issued press releases about the
presentation and publication of Albuferon clinical trial results, which named Benhamou as a co-
author. An oral presentation of the data was made at the EASL 2007 Conference.
45. There, in his suite at the Hotel Arts Barcelona, Skowron gave Benhamou an
envelope containing approximately €5,000, which, on that date, was roughly equivalent to
$6,713.00. He told Benhamou it was a present and that Skowron and FrontPoint were happy
with all of their interactions with Benhamou to date.
46. The next day, on April 13, 2007, Benhamou emailed Skowron and, among other
things, asked Skowron about HGSI stock: “What is your thought regarding human genome stock
price within the next 4 months[?]” He concluded the email with a promise to call Skowron “in 8
or 10 days for wines in chambourcy.”
47. In September 2007, while preparing to take a trip to New York with his wife,
Benhamou contacted Skowron and asked for advice on hotels. Skowron asked his assistant to
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 17 of 51
17
make reservations for the Benhamous at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in New York. The
Benhamous stayed at the Mandarin Oriental for four nights and checked out on September 20,
2007. Skowron paid for their hotel stay, including dinner, which cost $5,152.15, and later
expensed the cost, thereby passing other expense on to five of the Hedge Fund Defendants,
including the FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P.
48. In or about November 2007, both Skowron and Benhamou attended the AASDL
2007 Conference in Boston, Massachusetts. Benhamou co-authored two abstracts published in
advance of this meeting that announced certain results of the ongoing Albuferon clinical trials.
Both of these abstracts (as well as another abstract co-authored by Benhamou relating to a
different subject) disclosed that Benhamou was a “Consultant/Advisor” to HGSI. On November
6, 2007, one of the Albuferon studies that Benhamou co-authored was presented in open session
at the meeting.
49. On November 3, 2007, while attending the AASDL 2007 Conference, Benhamou
and Skowron met and spoke at a cocktail party hosted by Guidepoint Global at the Westin Hotel.
50. Skowron and Benhamou met again on the evening of November 5, 2007, when
Skowron gave Benhamou a tour of the Boston area, including Harvard Medical School, and
treated Benhamou to dinner and wine at Blue Ginger in Wellesley, Massachusetts. Benhamou
emailed Skowron the next day to thank him for dinner and “the [very] pleasant time spent
discussing with you… I hope that I will have one day the opportunity to do the same for you,
your wife and all the family.” Skowron told him “it’s just the beginning… that was a fantastic
dinner!” On November 6, 2007, Skowron reported to Guidepoint Global that he had a one-on-
one consultation with Benhamou during the AASLD conference. On November 19, 2007,
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 18 of 51
18
Skowron submitted the receipt from his dinner with Benhamou for reimbursement from
FrontPoint. The cost of dinner was allocated among five of the Hedge Fund Defendants.
51. Additionally, in or about November 2007, Skowron told Benhamou he was
contemplating starting a new biotechnology fund and asked Benhamou if he wanted to be a
consultant or permanent advisor to the fund.
52. Skowron knew at the time that Benhamou served on the Achieve Trial Steering
Committee or was otherwise affiliated with the Achieve Trial. Benhamou’s name had been
publicly associated with the trial. Among other things, Benhamou was listed as a co-author on
several presentations and abstracts related to the Albuferon clinical trial. He presented interim
and final trial results at the EASL 2007 Conference and at the 2007 AASLD Conference and
spoke at seminars arranged by Guidepoint Global, including the following:
• On Saturday, November 3, 2007, Benhamou spoke at a seminar in Boston that had been arranged with certain consulting clients who were also attending the 2007 AASLD Conference. There Benhamou discussed, among other topics, the results of Phase 2b of the Achieve Trial.
• On Monday, November 5, 2007, HGSI formally presented the Achieve Trial’s Phase
2b final results and its presentation slides identified Benhamou as affiliated with the Achieve Trial.
Additionally, beginning no later than November 2007, HGSI circulated materials to the Phase 3
investigators which identified Benhamou as a member of the Steering Committee and thus it was
widely known that Benhamou was affiliated with Phase 3 of the Albuferon trial not only as an
investigator but as a Steering Committee member.
IV. Benhamou Learned Of Material Non-Public Adverse Events During Phase 3 Of The Achieve Trial 53. On November 12 and 29, 2007, two participants who were receiving the 1,200-
microgram dosage of Albuferon in the Achieve Trial suffered serious adverse events of
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 19 of 51
19
interstitial lung disease as possible side effects of the dosage they were receiving. One of the
patients died shortly thereafter on or about December 1, 2007.
54. As a member of the Achieve Trial’s Steering Committee – a committee of five
doctors who were responsible for overseeing the conduct of the Achieve Trial – Benhamou
learned of the existence and underlying details of these material non-public adverse events no
later than Saturday, December 1, 2007. He learned at the same time that HGSI’s next step was
to alert the Achieve Trial’s Data Monitoring Committee (“DMC”), an independent committee
responsible for overseeing the safety of patients involved in the Achieve Trial. The DMC had
the authority to recommend whether to stop, continue, or modify the Achieve Trial.
55. On or about December 5, 2007, an individual at HGSI sent an email to members
of the Steering Committee indicating that the Albuferon trial’s independent safety committee
believed that the serious adverse events required further examination.
56. Based on its conversations with the DMC, HGSI informed all Steering Committee
members between December 7 and December 8, 2007, that the DMC (i) was considering
recommending a dose reduction to 900 micrograms for all subjects then being treated with 1,200
micrograms of Albuferon and (ii) would hold a meeting during the week of December 10, 2007
to further review and discuss the data and make a recommendation as to how to proceed with the
trial.
57. On Sunday, December 9, 2007, at approximately 8 p.m. EST, HGSI held an
urgent phone conference with Benhamou and other Steering Committee members to plan for the
upcoming meeting with the DMC. HGSI and the Steering Committee were concerned that the
DMC would eliminate the 1,200-microgram arm of the Achieve Trial. They discussed, among
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 20 of 51
20
other things, putting in place an enhanced patient monitoring plan with intensified focus on
patients with cough and dyspnea.
58. Benhamou participated in the December 9 phone conference from Hawaii where
he was attending HEP DART 2007, a scientific conference dedicated to the advancement of
knowledge about ongoing drug development processes for the treatment of hepatitis B and C.
Benhamou and two other Steering Committee members were scheduled to give (and did give)
presentations at the conference, on December 11 and 12, 2007.
59. On Monday, December 10, 2007, at 10:44 a.m. EST, HGSI emailed all Steering
Committee members a draft proposal – intended for circulation to the DMC in advance of the
upcoming meeting – which set forth a plan for the enhanced monitoring of all participants in the
Achieve Trial and also recommended obtaining further input from pulmonologists. Between
December 10 and 11, 2007, HGSI, Benhamou, and other members of the Steering Committee
had multiple communications in which they discussed and revised the proposal for enhanced
monitoring and prepared for the upcoming DMC meeting.
60. The DMC meeting took place on Wednesday, December 12, 2007, by
teleconference, and occurred in three phases: (i) an initial open session meeting in which the
Steering Committee members and various representatives of HGSI and others participated, (ii) a
closed session meeting with DMC Committee members only, and (iii) a concluding open
session.
61. After hours of deliberation, the DMC decided to allow the Achieve Trial to
continue unchanged in order to allow HGSI time to conduct additional pulmonary screening of
all trial participants, beginning with patients exhibiting ongoing symptoms of cough and
dyspnea. The DMC wanted data on symptomatic patients by Christmas 2007 and stated that,
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 21 of 51
21
after receiving and reviewing such data, it would reconvene and make its complete
recommendation regarding the 1,200-microgram arm.
62. By no later than 10 p.m. EST on December 12, 2007, all members of the Steering
Committee were aware of the details of the DMC’s non-public recommendation, including its
desire to receive additional data by Christmas 2007.
V. The November/December 2007 Tip and Trades
63. Upon information and belief, on or before December 7, 2007, but after Benhamou
learned of the two non-public cases of interstitial lung disease and that the DMC would be
notified and make a recommendation affecting the future of the Achieve Trial, Benhamou tipped
material negative non-public information about the Achieve Trial to Skowron. Skowron, acting
pursuant to the authority delegated to him by the Investment Advisor Defendants, caused each of
the Hedge Fund Defendants to sell a percentage of their holdings of HGSI common stock based
on the information Benhamou tipped to him.
64. On December 10, 2007, after Benhamou learned that the DMC was considering
modifying the Achieve Trial’s dosage levels and after the Steering Committee and HGSI
formulated an action plan for the upcoming DMC meeting, Benhamou called Skowron from the
HEP DART 2007 Conference. During that call, which lasted approximately five minutes,
Benhamou tipped Skowron additional material non-public information about the Achieve Trial.
Skowron knew or absent deliberate recklessness should have known that the information was
confidential and was disclosed by Benhamou in breach of his duty to HGSI to keep such
information confidential. Nonetheless, acting pursuant to the authority delegated to him by the
Investment Advisor Defendants, Skowron caused the Hedge Fund Defendants to trade on the
information that Benhamou tipped to him.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 22 of 51
22
65. At 2:05 p.m. EST on December 10, 2007, as soon as Skowron finished his call
with Benhamou, he called Co-Portfolio Manager 2 and caused Co-Portfolio Manager 2 to place
an order to sell half of the Hedge Fund Defendants’ holdings of HGSI common stock:
Co-Portfolio Mgr. 2: “[FrontPoint Trader] load up to sell ½ the HGSI in the funds; no rush, work w/volume”
FrontPoint Trader: “ok, I am still working order from Friday, sold 335K at 10.83…”
Co-Portfolio Mgr. 2: “[o]k” “keep working more” FrontPoint Trader: “got it”
Co-Portfolio Manager 2, who was in New York at the time, placed the order with FrontPoint
Trader while he was still on the phone with Skowron. Immediately thereafter, Skowron emailed
Benhamou at the HEP DART 2007 Conference and asked Benhamou to keep the information
confidential:
Skowron: “Let’s keep this very confidential. Thanks shaun [sic] for calling. I Will get back to you.”
66. Two days later, on December 12, 2007, Skowron reduced the size of the
December 10 sell order. Before giving FrontPoint Trader any instructions, Skowron exchanged
the following instant message with Co-Portfolio Manager 3, in which he referenced material
non-public information about the Achieve Trial and the hepatitis conference that Benhamou was
attending in Hawaii, but also referenced developments with other products in HGSI’s pipeline:
9:44:00 a.m. EST Skowron: “i think we should reduce the size of our sale in hgsi to 1/3 instead of 1/2”
9:44:16 a.m. EST Skowron: “interferon’s are known to have infections associated with them”
9:44:17 a.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “reason?” 9:44:28 a.m. EST Skowron: “it’s 2 cases in over 4k
patients” 9:44:33 a.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “fair pint” 9:44:35 a.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “point”
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 23 of 51
23
9:44:47 a.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “plus movement forward with pipeline”
9:44:51 a.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “GLP and LPPLA2 [two other drugs HGSI was developing, one for the treatment of diabetes, the other for the control and treatment of cardiovascular disease]”
9:44:52 a.m. EST Skowron: “yeah” 9:44:54 a.m. EST Skowron: “exactly” 9:44:59 a.m. EST Skowron: “people will be bullish on
this” 9:45:04 a.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “agreed” 9:45:17 a.m. EST Skowron: “the meeting is giong [sic] on
right now in hawiaii [sic] and no one is saying anything about this”
Less than a minute later, Skowron instructed FrontPoint Trader to sell only one-third of the
Hedge Fund Defendants’ holdings of HGSI common stock, instead of one-half.
67. On December 18, 2007, at 2:50 p.m. EST, Skowron cancelled the remainder of
the sell order. Earlier that day, HGSI announced positive results relating to a fourth drug in its
pipeline, ABthrax, for the treatment of inhalation anthrax; HGSI’s stock price and volume were
up on the news. But, by then, FrontPoint Trader had already sold all but 60,000 shares of the
original order, leaving the Hedge Fund Defendants with approximately 3.2 million shares.
68. Between December 7 and 18, 2007, the Hedge Fund Defendants sold over 2.8
million, or 46 percent, of their shares of HGSI common stock at an average price of $10.65 per
share while in the possession of material non-public information concerning HGSI. Each of the
Hedge Fund Defendants sold the following number of HGSI shares:
Hedge Fund Defendant
HGSI Shares Sold Dec. 7 – 18, 2007
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P.
849,829
FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P.
865,171
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 24 of 51
24
FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P.
88,100
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P.
626,000
FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P.
364,400
FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P.
81,000
Total 2,874,500
69. Trading in the portfolios of the Hedge Fund Defendants was accomplished as
follows: FrontPoint Trader would enter instructions to sell a certain percentage of the total HGSI
shares held across all of the Hedge Fund Defendants into a computerized order management
system. Once the shares were sold, the system automatically increased or decreased each Fund’s
position in the stock in accordance with a pre-determined formula.
VI. Benhamou Learned The Date Of The DMC Meeting In Which The DMC Would Deliver Its Final Recommendation 70. Shortly after the DMC made its December 12, 2007 recommendation, Benhamou
received and was asked to comment on a draft communication that HGSI intended to send to the
Achieve Trial investigators, asking them to: (i) run additional pulmonary tests on patients with
ongoing cough or dyspnea and to provide the data to HGSI by December 21, 2007, (ii) contact
all patients every two weeks to assess for symptoms of cough or dyspnea and bring them in for
further evaluation, and (iii) perform pulmonary function tests and chest x-rays on asymptomatic
patients in the next four weeks. In his capacity as an investigator, Benhamou received the
finalized version of the communication on December 13, 2007 and a follow-up communication
that was sent to investigators on December 14, 2007, both of which reiterated that patient visits
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 25 of 51
25
should be completed and the underlying data faxed to HGSI by December 21. Benhamou knew
by then that the DMC would not meet until late December and probably not until January 2008.
71. Throughout December 2007 and early January 2008, Benhamou and the other
Steering Committee members received from HGSI numerous communications regarding the
incoming test results, which HGSI told Benhamou it was just starting to receive on January 4,
2008. Benhamou also received and was asked to comment on drafts of an HGSI white paper and
presentation slides for the upcoming DMC meeting.
72. By January 8, 2008, the Steering Committee was informed that the DMC would
meet on January 17, 2008 to give its recommendation on the Achieve Trial.
73. Between January 8 and January 18, 2008, Skowron and Benhamou exchanged
numerous emails. The emails were mostly social in nature. Skowron told Benhamou that he was
“desperately trying to find time to get over to Paris before Milan [where the 43rd annual meeting
of the European Association for the Study of the Liver Conference (“EASL 2008 Conference”)
would be held in April 2008],” so he could have dinner with Benhamou. He also invited
Benhamou to his home where, according to his email, “the wine sits and waits for us in my
cellar!” In a January 10 email, Benhamou also asked Co-Portfolio Manager 1 for stock advice,
including advice regarding HGSI stock:
As I am thinking to put money in the stock I would like to have your opinion on: 1. Human Genome, do you think the stock will go up? What price? When? 2. Do you have any information on KING PHARMA?
Any other ideas for the near future[?] In response, the portfolio manager stated, “I think HGSI is a good enough company and not
currently reflecting the value of albuferon… let along the rest of their pipeline… but rest is
VERY high risk. The stock will go up on the albuferon data… this year.”
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 26 of 51
26
74. Upon information and belief, during one of their January exchanges, Benhamou
tipped additional material non-public information about the Achieve Trial to Skowron, including
information about the DMC meeting. On the morning of January 17, 2008, less than four hours
before the DMC met, Skowron emailed Benhamou and asked, “Want to touch base today?”
VII. Benhamou Learned Of The Steering Committee’s Recommendation
75. The DMC meeting took place at 1:30 p.m. EST on Thursday, January 17, 2008,
by teleconference, and occurred in three phases: (i) an initial open session meeting in which
HGSI, the Steering Committee members, and others participated, (ii) a closed session meeting
with DMC members, and (iii) a concluding open session.
76. After more than an hour of closed session deliberations, the DMC recommended
that (i) the 1,200-microgram arm of the Achieve Trial be stopped and that all patients receiving
that dosage level be given the 900-microgram dose instead and (ii) all patients with interstitial
findings on their chest x-rays (of which there were eighteen) be removed from treatment.
77. Benhamou did not participate in the concluding open session, but, later that
afternoon, at 4:38 p.m. EST, HGSI emailed him and other Steering Committee members the
details of the DMC’s recommendation. The emailed informed Benhamou that, among other
things, “[t]he DMC was clear in their recommendation to drop the 1200 arm – dose reduce all
patients to 900.”
VIII. The January 2008 Tip and Trades
78. On Friday, January 18, 2008, at 9:41 a.m. EST, HGSI sent the Steering
Committee members a second email in which HGSI: (i) detailed the DMC recommendation to
dose reduce all patients on the 1,200-microgram arm to the 900-microgram arm, (ii) requested
guidance from the Steering Committee on how to convey the DMC’s recommendation in a letter
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 27 of 51
27
to investigators and in a press release, a draft of which was to be ready later that day or over the
weekend, and (iii) requested guidance from Benhamou on how to address concerns that may be
raised by the European Union and other global investigators participating in the trial. HGSI also
requested times at which to call Benhamou to discuss the DMC recommendation.
79. Minutes after receiving this email, Benhamou emailed Skowron asking “When
can I call you?” Skowron responded “now? [number provided].”
80. Less than ten minutes after receiving HGSI’s email, at 9:49 a.m. EST, Benhamou
told HGSI that he was not available and requested a time to call the following day.
81. At 9:50 a.m. EST, exactly one minute after telling HGSI he was not available,
Benhamou contacted Skowron and the two had a conversation in which Benhamou disclosed to
Skowron that HGSI was discontinuing the 1200-microgram dosage part of the clinical trial of
Albuferon as a result of the serious adverse events. Skowron knew that Benhamou was affiliated
with Phase 3 of the trial and that the information tipped by Benhamou was confidential and was
disclosed by Benhamou in breach of his fiduciary duty to HGSI.
82. Within minutes of receiving the tip from Benhamou, Skowron caused each of the
Hedge Fund Defendants to sell their remaining holdings of HGSI common stock based on the
material non-public information Benhamou tipped to him. Specifically, at 9:58 a.m. EST, on
January 18, 2008, Skowron instructed FrontPoint Trader via instant message to sell all remaining
shares of HGSI common stock held by the Hedge Fund Defendants:
Skowron: “[FrontPoint Trader] sell the hgsi” “all of it” FrontPoint Trader: “ok”
Skowron was acting pursuant to the authority delegated to him by the Investment Advisor
Defendants.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 28 of 51
28
83. Shortly after receiving Skowron’s instructions, FrontPoint Trader contacted a
certain investment bank (“Investment Bank”) and asked for a bid to buy all remaining 3.2 million
shares of HGSI held by the Hedge Fund Defendants. When Investment Bank came back with a
bid of approximately $10 per share, Skowron and FrontPoint Trader declined the offer and
decided instead to sell the Hedge Fund Defendants’ HGSI shares into the market. By the close
of the markets on January 18, 2008, the Hedge Fund Defendants had sold almost 700,000 shares
of HGSI common stock at an average price of $10.72 a share. Each of the Hedge Fund
Defendants sold the following number of HGSI shares:
Hedge Fund Defendant
HGSI Shares Sold on Jan. 18, 2008
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P.
201,800
FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P.
199,300
FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P.
20,800
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P.
176,100
FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P.
84,100
FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P.
15,800
Total 697,100
IX. Benhamou Continued To Receive Information About The Timing And Content Of The Press Release And Investigator Letter Throughout The Long Weekend 84. From Friday, January 18, 2008 through Monday, January 21, 2008, Benhamou
worked closely with executives at HGSI on (i) the content and logistics of the letter to
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 29 of 51
29
investigators, which was to be issued simultaneously with HGSI’s press release announcing the
dose reduction and (ii) HGSI’s response to questions that were expected to arise from the public
and the Achieve Trial investigators.
85. Benhamou knew, no later than Friday, January 18, 2008, that HGSI planned to
issue its press release during the middle of the following week. He knew, no later than January
21, 2008, that HGSI would issue its press release on Wednesday, January 23, 2008.
86. Upon information and belief, Benhamou tipped additional material non-public
information about the Achieve Trial to Skowron on or before January 22, 2008. On the morning
of Tuesday, January 22, 2008 – the first trading day after the Martin Luther King Holiday
weekend and the day before HGSI was to issue its press release about the dose reduction –
Skowron emailed Benhamou and asked, “[A]re you around for a quick call today. Love to catch
up.”
X. The Other January 2008 Tip And Trade Acceleration
87. Skowron called Benhamou at 10:44 a.m. EST, on January 22, 2008. The phone
call lasted approximately 14 minutes. During that call, Benhamou tipped Skowron additional
material non-public information about the Achieve Trial, including information about HGSI’s
planned press release. Skowron knew or absent deliberate recklessness should have known that
the information was confidential and was disclosed by Benhamou in breach of his duty to HGSI
to keep such information confidential. Pursuant to the authority delegated to him by the
Investment Advisor Defendants, and in response to the information that Benhamou tipped him,
Skowron caused the Hedge Fund Defendants to accelerate their sales of HGSI common stock.
88. While Skowron was still on the telephone with Benhamou, he and FrontPoint
Trader engaged in the following communication via instant message, in which Skowron
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 30 of 51
30
indicated, among other things, that he expected HGSI’s stock price to drop from approximately
$10 per share to $7 to $8 per share and instructed the trader to become more aggressive with the
sales:
10:49:59 a.m. EST Skowron: “[FrontPoint Trader], try and get a little more aggressive with hgsi”
10:50:08 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “ok” 10:50:33 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “225K out of 980 is pretty
aggressive but I hear you” 10:51:12 a.m. EST Skowron: “i show we still own 2.3m
shares.” 10:51:13 a.m. EST Skowron: “is that right” 10:51:33 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “yes, we held over 3MM” 10:51:37 a.m. EST Skowron: “ok.” 10:51:40 a.m. EST Skowron: “work out of all of it” 10:51:48 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “i AM TRYING” 10:51:51 a.m. EST Skowron: “oh” 10:51:54 a.m. EST Skowron: “ok” 10:53:01 a.m. EST Skowron: “[FrontPoint Trader] let’s
look together at the optino market” 10:53:28 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “optino? Is that Latin for
options?” 10:53:28 a.m. EST Skowron: “i think this stock could see 7
or 8” 10:54:25 a.m. EST Skowron: “we can sell calls?” 10:55:14 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “We need to find someone·
willing to amke [sic] a bid on that many calls and that is problematic in this environment”
The fourth co-portfolio manager saw the instant message and suggested shorting HGSI’s debt as
a hedge.
89. Approximately half an hour later, at 11:28 a.m. EST, Benhamou informed
Skowron that his daughter would be visiting New York and asked if Skowron could recommend
a car service to pick her up at the airport. Skowron said he would make the arrangements and
pay for the car service, and he told Benhamou, “Don’t hesitate to let me know if you need
anything.”
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 31 of 51
31
XI. The Hedge Fund Defendants Sold All Remaining HGSI Shares In A Block Trade At The End Of The Day On January 22, 2008 90. Throughout the day on January 22, 2008, the Hedge Fund Defendants continued
to sell HGSI shares into the market at an average price of $10.37. Near the end of the trading
day, with almost 2 million HGSI shares remaining, FrontPoint Trader contacted Investment Bank
again and asked for a bid on their remaining shares. Investment Bank came back with a bid of
$9.63 per share for the block trade. Skowron accepted the offer and all remaining shares of
HGSI common stock held by the Hedge Fund Defendants were sold shortly before the close of
the markets.
91. The Hedge Fund Defendants’ sale of HGSI shares on January 22 comprised 47
percent of the total trading volume in HGSI shares that day.
92. In anticipation that HGSI’s announcement on January 23 would cause HGSI’s
stock price to decline, Skowron and the other co-portfolio managers instant-messaged each other
on January 22 to congratulate FrontPoint Trader for having completely sold out of the HGSI
position:
3:36:12 p.m. EST Skowron: “how did we make out on hgsi?”
3:36:13 p.m. EST Skowron: “net” 3:37:11 p.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “we would have been better
off hitting the $10 bid” 3:37:17 p.m. EST Skowron: “by how much?” 3:37:32 p.m. EST Skowron: “and in the context of a·
market meltdown...i’m not concerned about that” 3:37:36 p.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “calculating it now” 3:37:42 p.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “right”
* * * * * 4:10:50 p.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “HGSi we are flat” 4:11:03 p.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 2: “nice” 4:11:07 p.m. EST Co-Portfolio Mgr. 3: “awesome”
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 32 of 51
32
XII. HGSI Issued Its Negative Press Release And The Hedge Fund Defendants Bought HGSI Shares
93. On January 23, 2008, at 7:00 a.m. EST, HGSI issued its press release concerning
the DMC’s recommendation and its decision to stop the 1,200-microgram arm of the Achieve
Trial. As a result of the announcement, HGSI’s share price dropped from $10.02 a share at the
close of the previous day, to $5.62 a share at the close of January 23, 2008, a 44 percent decline.
94. By virtue of having sold all of their holdings (over six million shares) of HGSI
common stock by the close of the prior day, the Hedge Fund Defendants avoided at least $30
million in losses.
95. Representatives of the Investment Bank contacted FrontPoint on January 23, soon
after HGSI issued its press release, and made a request to break the January 22 block trade.
Skowron refused to do so.
96. Nonetheless, on the morning of January 23, 2008, Skowron told his co-portfolio
managers that he still wanted to own HGSI stock and he recommended that, if HGSI’s share
price hit $6, they should buy HGSI shares again. Co-Portfolio Manager 2 opined that, if
Albuferon proves to be safe at the lower (900-microgram) dose level, then the investment thesis
for owning HGSI had not changed. Skowron separately expressed the view that Albuferon
remains the thesis for owning HGSI until the investor base changes.
97. On January 23, 2008, acting pursuant to the authority delegated to him by the
Investment Advisor Defendants, Skowron caused the Hedge Fund Defendants to purchase more
than 2.2 million shares of HGSI common stock at an average price of $5.60 per share. Each of
the Hedge Fund Defendants bought the following number of HGSI shares:
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 33 of 51
33
Hedge Fund Defendant HGSI Shares Purchased on Jan. 23, 2008
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Fund, L.P.
763,541
FrontPoint Healthcare Horizons Fund, L.P.
439,400
FrontPoint Healthcare I Fund, L.P.
79,200
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P.
666,900
FrontPoint Healthcare Long Horizons Fund, L.P.
489,700
FrontPoint Healthcare Centennial Fund, L.P.
0
Total 2,438,741
98. On January 24, 2008, after HGSI’s stock prices had been updated by numerous
analysts, Skowron ordered FrontPoint Trader to sell the shares that had been acquired on January
23 for a quick profit.
8:52:22 a.m. EST Skowron: “also load the hgsi to sell” 8:52:31 a.m. EST Skowron: “27 upgrades today” 8:52:32 a.m. EST FrontPoint Trader: “ok” 8:52:38 a.m. EST Skowron: “we’ll trade around it” 9:52:44 a.m. EST Skowron: “... some more”
99. Between January 24 and 31, 2008, FrontPoint Trader sold at a profit more than
1.5 million of the shares that the Hedge Fund Defendants acquired on January 23, 2008.
100. The co-portfolio managers maintained their investment thesis that HGSI was
undervalued based on Albuferon’s commercial opportunities and maintained their target of $17
per share through at least April 2008.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 34 of 51
34
XIII. Skowron Attempted a Cover-Up When His Trading Scheme Came to FrontPoint’s Attention
101. On or about February 13, 2008, the SEC advised FrontPoint that it was
investigating FrontPoint’s January 22, 2008 sale of HGSI stock to the Investment Bank. In
connection with this investigation, FrontPoint’s counsel and the SEC scheduled the interview of
Skowron for February 26, 2008. Skowron thereafter undertook actions to cover up his
wrongdoing.
102. On February 20, 2008, approximately one week before Skowron was scheduled to
be interviewed by the SEC in connection with its investigation into the Hedge Fund Defendants’
January 22 block trade in HGSI stock, Skowron contacted Benhamou by email purportedly to set
up a consultation through Guidepoint Global. Skowron’s email said that he wanted to speak to
Benhamou about “Hep C drug development” and to “set something up for Milan.”
103. On that date, starting at approximately 2:40 p.m. EST, Skowron and Benhamou
spoke for approximately 6.4 minutes. Upon information and belief, during this call, Skowron
told Benhamou about the SEC’s investigation and also that FrontPoint’s counsel wished to
interview Benhamou by phone. Skowron urged Benhamou to deceive FrontPoint’s counsel and
tell them that he never gave Skowron confidential information about the Albuferon trial and only
discussed the “basket of drugs” available for liver disease. Shortly after the conclusion of his 6.4
minute conversation with Benhamou, Skowron emailed Guidepoint Global and reported that he
had a consultation with Benhamou.
104. The next day, at approximately 8:26 a.m. EST, Skowron called Benhamou and
then conferenced in FrontPoint’s counsel and made the introduction. FrontPoint’s telephone
records reflect that the conversation lasted for approximately 21.4 minutes, or, until 8:47 a.m.
EST. Upon information and belief, Benhamou deceived FrontPoint’s counsel on the call and
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 35 of 51
35
told FrontPoint’s counsel that he did not give Skowron any non-public information about the
Albuferon trial. At 8:50 a.m. EST, FrontPoint’s counsel emailed Skowron and told him that the
call with Benhamou “went well.” Skowron forwarded that email to Benhamou.
105. On or about February 24, 2008, Benhamou traveled to Boston, Massachusetts for
a meeting with a large pharmaceutical company. Skowron knew of the trip in advance and drove
to Boston to take Benhamou to lunch. After the lunch, Skowron drove Benhamou to
Benhamou’s hotel in Boston and attempted to give Benhamou a bag containing two stacks of
U.S. currency wrapped in bands. Benhamou understood that Skowron was offering this money
as payment for the material non-public information about the Albuferon trial that Benhamou had
tipped to Skowron in January 2008. Benhamou, who was slated to fly back to France the next
day, did not accept the money.
106. In April 2008, while in Milan, Italy, for the EASL 2008 Conference, Skowron
met Benhamou at a hotel bar. There, on or about April 22, 2008, Skowron gave Benhamou an
envelope containing U.S. currency worth at least $10,000. He told Benhamou it was in
appreciation of Benhamou’s contributions, consultations, and time. He reiterated that Benhamou
should continue to falsely state that the two had only discussed publicly available information
about the “basket of drugs” available for the treatment of hepatitis C and other diseases of the
liver. Skowron also assured Benhamou that everything would be fine and the SEC’s
investigation would end soon.
107. On or about May 14, 2009, in connection with the SEC’s investigation,
Benhamou testified in an administrative proceeding of the Autorité Des Marchés Financiers, the
French securities regulator, in the presence of two SEC staff attorneys in Paris. Consistent with
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 36 of 51
36
the request made of him by Skowron, Benhamou falsely stated that he did not reveal non-public
information concerning the Albuferon clinical trial to Skowron.
108. Subsequently, on or about August 11, 2009, Skowron provided sworn testimony
to the SEC in an effort to influence the SEC’s investigation. Among other things, Skowron
stated that at the relevant time he did not know who worked on the Albuferon clinical trial; that
he spoke to Benhamou about various drugs to treat hepatitis, including Albuferon, but he didn’t
think they had ever discussed the Albuferon clinical trial; and that he had never given Benhamou
a gift or anything of value.
109. In November 2009, after Benhamou ceased retaining the French law firm that had
earlier represented him in the SEC’s investigation due to costs, Skowron offered to take care of
Benhamou’s attorneys’ fees in connection with that matter.
XIV. The SEC And USA Brought Civil and Criminal Charges Against Benhamou and Skowron and FrontPoint Settled with the SEC
110. On November 2, 2010, the SEC filed a complaint in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York against Benhamou. The SEC charged Benhamou
with unlawfully tipping inside information concerning HGSI’s clinical trial for Albuferon in
advance of HGSI’s negative announcement on January 23, 2008. Specifically, the SEC alleged
that Benhamou violated the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws, Section 17(a) of
the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a) and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.
§ 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5.
111. Also on November 2, 2010, the United States Attorney’s Office filed a parallel
criminal action, also in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York,
against Benhamou. In the complaint, the United States alleges, based on similar allegations to
those contained in the SEC’s complaint, that Benhamou conspired to commit, and committed,
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 37 of 51
37
securities fraud. On April 11, 2011, Benhamou plead guilty, pursuant to a cooperation
agreement with the United States, to a four-count Information charging him with conspiracy to
commit securities fraud, securities fraud, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false
statements, all in connection with the insider trading scheme described herein involving HGSI
securities. Benhamou is cooperating in the hope of receiving a reduced sentence.
112. A day later, on April 12, 2011, the SEC filed an amended complaint in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York, adding Skowron as a defendant in
the civil action against Benhamou. In the amended complaint, the SEC charged Skowron with
compensating Benhamou in return for material non-public information concerning HGSI’s
clinical trial for Albuferon in advance of HGSI’s negative announcement on January 23, 2008.
Specifically, the SEC alleged that Skowron and Benhamou violated the antifraud provisions of
the federal securities laws, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a) and
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, 17 C.F.R. §
240.10b-5.
113. Also on April 12, 2011, the United States Attorney’s Office filed a parallel
criminal action, also in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York,
against Skowron. In the complaint, the United States alleges, based on similar allegations to
those contained in the SEC’s complaint, that Skowron conspired to commit, and committed,
securities fraud, and conspired to obstruct justice.
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
114. Plaintiffs bring this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased shares of HGSI
from December 7, 2007 through January 22, 2008, the “Class Period” (the “Class”). Excluded
from the Class are (1) Defendants; (2) members of the immediate family of the individual
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 38 of 51
38
Defendants; (3) any subsidiaries or affiliates of the Defendants; (4) any person or entity who is,
or was during the Class Period, an investor in or a partner, officer, director, employee or
controlling person of the Defendants; (5) any entity in which any of the Defendants has a
controlling interest; and (6) the legal representatives, heirs, successors or assigns of any of the
excluded persons or entities specified in this paragraph.
115. The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is
impracticable. While Plaintiffs do not know the exact number of Class members, Plaintiffs
believe that there are many hundreds of members of the Class who purchased shares of HGSI
common stock contemporaneously with the sale of HGSI common stock by Defendants during
the Class Period.
116. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient
adjudication of this controversy.
117. Common questions of law and fact exist as to all members of the Class, and
predominate over any questions affecting solely individual members of the Class. Among the
questions of law and fact common to the Class are:
a. Whether the federal securities laws were violated by the Defendants’ acts as
alleged herein;
b. Whether the Defendants engaged in manipulative or deceptive devices or
schemes to defraud in violation of Section 10(b) or the Exchange Act and Rule
10b-5;
c. Whether the Defendants are liable to the Plaintiffs and the Class for insider
trading pursuant to § 20A of the Exchange Act;
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 39 of 51
39
d. Whether FrontPoint, the Investment Advisor Defendants, and Skowron are
liable to the Plaintiffs and the Class as “controlling persons” of the Hedge Fund
Defendants pursuant to § 20(a) of the Exchange Act;
e. The relief to which Plaintiffs and the members of the Class are entitled,
including disgorgement, constructive trust, and an accounting.
118. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the members of the Class. Plaintiffs
will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the members of the Class and have retained
counsel competent and experienced in class and securities litigation. Plaintiffs have no interests
that are adverse or antagonistic to the Class.
119. A class action is superior to other available methods for fair and efficient
adjudication of the controversy since joinder of all members of the Class is impracticable.
Furthermore, the expense and burden of individual litigation make it impossible for the Class
members individually to redress the Defendants’ wrongful conduct. Plaintiffs know of no
difficulty which will be encountered in the management of this litigation which would preclude
its maintenance as a class action.
COUNT I
FOR VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 10(b) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT AND RULE 10b-5
(Against All of the Defendants)
120. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each of the allegations set forth above.
121. Benhamou, because he had entered into a special confidential relationship in the
conduct of HGSI’s business, owed a fiduciary duty to HGSI and its shareholders. Benhamou
breached that fiduciary duty when he disclosed material adverse information about the clinical
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 40 of 51
40
trials for Albuferon to Skowron. Benhamou benefitted personally – and intended to benefit – as
a result of the information he disclosed.
122. Skowron knew the position that Benhamou occupied and knew that the
information Benhamou disclosed about the clinical trials for Albuferon was in violation of
Benhamou’s fiduciary duty to HGSI and its shareholders. Thus, Defendants had a duty to
disclose the material adverse information about the clinical trials for Albuferon prior to trading in
HGSI stock with the investing public, or to abstain from trading in HGSI stock. Defendants’
duty ran to Plaintiffs and all members of the Class who purchased HGSI stock during the same
period in which the Hedge Fund Defendants sold HGSI stock. In breach of their duty to disclose
or abstain, Skowron, acting individually and in his capacity as principal for the Investment
Advisor Defendants and co-portfolio manager of the Hedge Fund Defendants, caused the Hedge
Fund Defendants to sell HGSI stock based upon the material non-public information Skowron
had received from Benhamou without making the required disclosures.
123. During the period between December 7 and January 22, 2008, inclusive,
Skowron, acting individually and in his capacity as principal for the Investment Advisor
Defendants and co-portfolio manager of the Hedge Fund Defendants, caused the Hedge Fund
Defendants to sell over six million shares of HGSI common stock while in the possession of
material non-public information concerning HGSI. Defendants had a duty to abstain or disclose,
and breached their duty when they sold HGSI stock without publicly disclosing such information
prior to their sales during the Class Period.
124. As described above, all of the actions of all of the Defendants herein, except
Benhamou, in connection with the sale of the Hedge Fund Defendants’ HGSI stock during the
Class Period were initiated, caused, and directed by Skowron, who was an officer, director, or
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 41 of 51
41
authorized agent of all of the Defendants herein, except Benhamou. Accordingly, Skowron’s
scienter is imputed to all of the other Defendants except Benhamou.
125. Defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder in that, as alleged above, in connection with the purchase and sale of
HGSI stock they: (a) employed devices, schemes, and artifices to defraud; (b) omitted material
facts that they were under a duty to disclose; or (c) engaged in acts, practices, and a course of
business that operated as a fraud or deceit upon the purchasers of HGSI common stock during
the Class Period.
126. Defendants, except Benhamou, also violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act
and Rule 10b-5 as “tippees.” They possessed material non-public information regarding HGSI,
which the tipper, Benhamou, disclosed to them. The tippees, all of the Defendants except
Benhamou, traded or caused the Hedge Fund Defendants to trade in HGSI stock during the Class
Period while in possession of the non-public information provided by Benhamou. Those
Defendants knew or should have known that Benhamou had violated a relationship of trust by
relaying the information and that Benhamou benefited from the disclosures to the Defendants
through the compensation he received as a result of his consulting relationship and arrangements
with the Defendants.
127. Defendant Benhamou is liable under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule
10b-5. He possessed confidential, material non-public information regarding HGSI’s trial of
Albuferon. Benhamou acted with scienter. Benhamou knew, should have known, or recklessly
disregarded that the information he possessed was highly confidential and could materially affect
the marketplace for HGSI shares. On numerous occasions he tipped that information to
Skowron, with whom he had a consulting relationship and friendship, with the expectation of
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 42 of 51
42
receiving a benefit. In making these disclosures, Benhamou violated fiduciary duties or similar
duties of trust and confidence to HGSI and its shareholders. Benhamou knew or should have
known that Skowron managed trades on behalf of the Hedge Fund Defendants and that Skowron,
by and through the Hedge Fund Defendants, was using the confidential, non-public adverse
information Benhamou was providing to unlawfully sell shares in HGSI. Benhamou is thus
liable for the Hedge Fund Defendants’ trades – directly or indirectly – because he unlawfully
tipped material non-public information to Skowron, who effected trades on behalf of the Hedge
Fund Defendants, controlled the funds, and/or unlawfully tipped the information to all of the
Defendants herein, except Benhamou.
128. The facts alleged herein give rise to a strong inference that Defendants acted with
scienter. Defendants had actual knowledge of the omissions of material facts set forth herein, or
acted with reckless disregard for the truth, in that they failed to ascertain and to disclose such
facts, even though such facts were available to them. For example, as set forth above, Skowron
knew that Benhamou served on the trial’s Steering Committee and owed a duty of confidentiality
to HGSI and its shareholders, but, nonetheless, he on numerous occasions throughout the Class
Period caused the Hedge Fund Defendants to sell their holdings of HGSI common stock while in
possession of material non-public information obtained from Benhamou.
129. As a result of Defendants’ failure to disclose material adverse information about
the clinical trials of Albuferon stock prior to trading in HGSI stock, the price of HGSI stock was
artificially inflated throughout the Class Period.
130. On January 23, 2008, HGSI issued its press release concerning the DMC’s
recommendation and its decision to stop the 1,200-microgram arm of the Achieve Trial. As a
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 43 of 51
43
result of the announcement, HGSI’s share price dropped from $10.02 a share at the close of the
previous day, to $5.62 a share at the close of January 23, 2008, a 44 percent decline.
131. Had Plaintiffs, the other members of the Class, and the marketplace known of the
material adverse information about the Albuferon trial, which Defendants did not disclose
despite their duty to do so, Plaintiffs and the other members of the Class would not have
purchased such securities or, if they had purchased such securities, they would not have done so
at the artificially inflated prices which they paid.
132. As a result of Defendants’ violation of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5, Plaintiffs and the members of the Class purchased HGSI stock prices which were
artificially inflated by reason of Defendants’ omissions concerning the clinical trials for
Albuferon, and suffered damages when the truth was disclosed. In ignorance of the fact that the
market price of HGSI’s common stock was artificially inflated, and relying upon the integrity of
the market in which such shares trade, and/or on the absence of material adverse information that
was known or, with recklessness, disregarded by Defendants but not disclosed by these
Defendants, Plaintiffs and the other members of the Class purchased HGSI stock at artificially
high prices, and were damaged when truthful information was disclosed and the inflation of
HGSI stock’ value was corrected.
133. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants have violated Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b), promulgated thereunder, and are liable to Plaintiffs and the
other members of the Class for damages which they suffered in connection with their purchases
of HGSI securities during the Class Period.
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 44 of 51
44
COUNT II
FOR LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 20A OF THE EXCHANGE ACT
(Against All of the Defendants)
134. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each of the allegations set forth above.
135. The claims set forth herein are brought under Section 20A of the Exchange Act
against all of the Defendants in connection with their insider trading of HGSI stock.
136. The Defendants (excluding Benhamou) knowingly or with deliberate recklessness
sold or caused to be sold over six million shares of HGSI stock during the Class Period while in
the possession of material, adverse, inside, non-public information and thereby avoided at least
$30 million in losses. Plaintiffs and the Class purchased HGSI stock contemporaneous with the
Hedge Fund Defendants’ sales.
137. Pursuant to Section 20A(a) of the Exchange Act, the Defendants are liable to the
Plaintiffs and the Class for all losses avoided by the Hedge Fund Defendants’ sales of HGSI
stock during the Class Period. Plaintiffs and the Class are also entitled to the return of the
amounts by which Defendants have been unjustly enriched through their sales of HGSI shares
during the Class Period and to disgorgement, a constructive trust, and an accounting.
138. Pursuant to Sections 20A(a) and (c) of the Exchange Act, Benhamou, by violating
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 by communicating material non-public
information about HGSI to Skowron and the other Defendants, is jointly and severally liable
with, and to the same extent as, the other Defendants.
COUNT III
FOR CONTROL PERSON LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 20(a) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT
(Against FrontPoint, the Investment Advisor Defendants and Skowron)
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 45 of 51
45
139. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each of the allegations set forth above.
140. This Count is brought against FrontPoint, the Investment Advisor Defendants, and
Skowron (collectively, the “Control Person Defendants”) for control person liability under
Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.
141. Under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, “Every person who, directly or
indirectly, controls any person liable under any provision of this title or of any rule or regulation
thereunder shall also be liable jointly and severally with and to the same extent as such
controlled person to any person to whom such controlled person is liable, unless the controlling
person acted in good faith and did not directly or indirectly induce the act or acts constituting the
violation or cause of action.”
142. Each of the Control Person Defendants controlled the Hedge Fund Defendants by
virtue of their positions as investment advisors and/or portfolio managers of the Hedge Fund
Defendants. Each of the Control Person Defendants in fact exercised control over the Hedge
Fund Defendants in connection with the sales of HGSI stock alleged herein.
143. By virtue of their positions as controlling persons of the Hedge Fund Defendants,
and their conduct in causing the Hedge Fund Defendants to sell their shares of HGSI during the
Class Period while in possession of material adverse information about HGSI, the Control Person
Defendants are jointly and severally liable, pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, to the
Plaintiffs and the Class with the Hedge Fund Defendants for the Hedge Fund Defendants’
liability under Counts I and II above.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief and judgment, as follows:
A. Declaring this action to be a proper Class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23;
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 46 of 51
46
B. Awarding compensatory damages against all of the Defendants, jointly and
severally, in favor of Plaintiffs for all losses and damages suffered as a result of the Defendants’
wrongdoing alleged herein, in an amount to be determined at trial, together with interest thereon;
C. Ordering Defendants to return the amounts by which they have been unjustly
enriched;
D. Awarding disgorgement of all profits, benefits, and other compensation obtained
by the Defendants as a result of Defendants’ misconduct alleged herein;
E. Imposing a constructive trust for the benefit of Plaintiffs and Class members on
all of Defendants’ ill-gotten gains and proceeds as a result of Defendants’ misconduct alleged
herein;
F. Ordering a certified accounting of the Defendants’ books and records to
determine the correct compensation owed to Plaintiffs and Class members as a result of
Defendants’ misconduct alleged herein;
G. Awarding Plaintiffs their reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this action,
including a reasonable allowance of fees for Plaintiffs’ attorneys and experts; and
H. Awarding Plaintiffs such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
proper.
Respectfully Submitted, PLAINTIFFS,
/s/ Edward F. Haber Edward F. Haber (pro hac vice) Michelle H. Blauner (pro hac vice) Ian McLoughlin (pro hac vice) Rachel Brown Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP 53 State Street Boston, MA 02109
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 47 of 51
47
Telephone: (617) 439-3939 Facsimile: (617) 439-0134 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Jeffrey S. Nobel (CT 04855) Nancy A. Kulesa (CT 25384) Izard Nobel LLP 29 South Main Street, Suite 215 West Hartford, CT 06107 Telephone: (860) 493-6292 Facsimile: (860) 493-6290 [email protected]
[email protected] Of Counsel: Paul Paradis Michael A. Schwartz Horwitz Horwitz & Paradis 405 Lexington Avenue, 61st Floor New York, NY 100174 Telephone: (212) 986-4500 Facsimile: (212) 986-4501 [email protected] [email protected]
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 48 of 51
48
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on September 19, 2011, a true copy of the foregoing Second Amended Class Action Complaint was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent by email to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system or will be served on anyone not registered to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF System.
/s/ Edward F. Haber Edward F. Haber
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 49 of 51
Schedule A
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 50 of 51
Case 3:11-cv-00010-WWE Document 118 Filed 09/19/11 Page 51 of 51
Top Related