Pardi
Pardi v. Tricida, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MICHAEL PARDI, et al., Case No. 21-cv-00076-HSG
8 Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
9 v. DENYING IN PART MOTION TO
DISMISS
10 TRICIDA, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 128 Defendants. 11
12 13 This putative securities class action was filed against Defendants Tricida, Inc. and Gerrit 14 Klaerner (collectively, “Defendants”). On June 1, 2021, Lead Plaintiff Jeffrey Fiore filed an 15 amended complaint alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act 16 of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. See Dkt No. 72 at ¶ 2. 17 The Court dismissed Fiore’s amended complaint with leave to amend. See Pardi v. Tricida, Inc., 18 No. 21-CV-00076-HSG, 2022 WL 3018144, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 29, 2022) (“Order”). Fiore then 19 filed a second amended complaint reasserting the same claims. See Dkt. No. 1421 (“SAC”). 20 Pending before the Court is Klaerner’s motion to dismiss the SAC, for which briefing is 21 complete.2 See Dkt. Nos.…