Legal Opinion
Gewirtz v. Opko Health, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided February 2, 2017No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-4352PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum Opinion
Rufe, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint by Defendants Opko Health, Inc. and Adam Logal. For the reasons that follow, Defendants’ motion is granted in part, but Plaintiffs will be granted leave to file a Third Amended Complaint.
I. BACKGROUND
The Second Amended Complaint alleges the following facts, which are taken as true for the purposes of this motion.1 Plaintiffs *442Jamie Gewirtz and Emily Gewirtz Stiebel are siblings who were assigned options to purchase stock in Defendant Opko from the estate of their father, Dr.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company and Nu-Car Carriers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Stanford Shane Otis Terrell Robert Stewart v. William Fauver, Commissioner James Barbo, Administrator Rogers, Chief Director of CustodyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Alan Schmidt v. John SkolasCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014
- Alston v. ParkerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Winfield v. Eloxx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2020