DARK has seen thousands DARK will never tell you, most get dismissed. DARK will also not tell you, the original case, the one all the rest of these are based, refuses to take into account the simple language of the safe harbor statement. The language in these complaints repeatedly used "...leading investors to believe..." is the problem. How can you lead investors to believe the FDA or EMA will grant a license in light of the cautionary provisions of the safe harbor statement issued each and every time, BEFORE the hopes and beliefs part is recited? Unless the company disclaimed the safe harbor statement, its applicable. One by one, we can march in the investors to a room, an mind you, they are 75% institutional, and ask them, "did ISIS tell you they had a license for sure? Where, when?" and one by one, they would all fail the test.
Also, its not ISIS who has led the market to believe, ITS THE FDA, voting 9 to 6.
So, in the end, if the FDA grants the license after all, the suits will non suit and ISIS will let it slide. I wish they would not let it slide. It has served the short side, and they deserve no reprieve, certainly not on the back of the existing investors and the company.
It seems like everytime we have a run up, another lawsuit is anounced for a pullback. Another run up, and another anouncement of another lawsuit setting up possibly another pullback tomorrow. We will see, but I have been riding the waves like so many of you. I am going to watch this closely. I can't help buy wonder if some good news is coming and insiders are buying before the news is anounced.