Company Overview of Wyeth LLC
Wyeth LLC develops, manufactures, distributes, and markets pharmaceutical products the United States, the United Kingdom, and internationally. The company’s Pharmaceuticals segment offers neuroscience therapies, vaccines, musculoskeletal therapies, nutritional products, gastroenterology drugs, anti-infectives, oncology therapies, hemophilia treatments, immunological products, and women's healthcare products. It offers its products to wholesalers, pharmacies, hospitals, governments, physicians, retailers, and other human healthcare institutions. The company's Consumer Healthcare segment develops, manufactures, distributes, and markets over-the-counter healthcare products comprising analgesics...
5 Giralda Farms
Madison, NJ 07940-1021
Founded in 1926
Key Executives for Wyeth LLC
Chief Counsel and Senior Vice President
Executive Vice President of Technical Operations and Product Supply Operational Excellence
Principal Corporate Officer and Vice President of Internal Audit
Vice President - Taxes and Member of Finance and Retirement Committees
Compensation as of Fiscal Year 2014.
Wyeth LLC Key Developments
Iowa Supreme Court Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment in Favor of Wyeth Inc., Schwarz Pharma Inc. and Pliva Inc
Aug 8 14
The Iowa Supreme Court reversed a grant of summary judgment in favor of a generic drug manufacturer on a failure to warn claim brought by a patient consumer of a medication produced by the generic maker and affirmed summary judgment granted in favor of two brand-name manufacturers of the medication. Theresa Huck sued three pharmaceutical companies, Wyeth Inc., Schwarz Pharma Inc. and Pliva Inc., alleging she contracted tardive dyskinesia, a neurological disorder, as a result of the prolonged use of metoclopramide, a medication sold under the brand name Reglan and as a competing generic formulation. Huck brought failure to warn, product liability, negligence and related claims against the defendants. A trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on all of Huck's claims. Huck appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed. The supreme court granted certiorari. The supreme court held that Huck's state common law tort claims against the generic manufacturer, which were based on inadequate warnings, were not preempted by federal drug labeling statutory law to the extent that Pliva, the generic maker of metoclopramide, failed to implement stronger warnings approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2004. The supreme court concluded Huck adequately alleged a claim of failure to warn against Pliva arising from Pliva's failure to implement the stronger warnings at issue. The supreme court separately declined to alter long-standing Iowa products liability law to allow recovery against a manufacturer for injuries caused by the use of its competitor's product. As a result, the supreme court joined the overwhelming majority of courts, including every federal circuit court of appeals, in holding Reglan brand makers were not liable to plaintiffs who consumed only the competing generic formulation. The supreme court held that under Iowa law, brand-name drugmakers owe no duty to consumers of generic drugs. To hold otherwise would render brand-name manufacturers the de facto insurers for competing generic manufacturers. While it may be foreseeable that a generic competitor would mimic a product design or label, the supreme court declined to step onto the slippery slope that would result from imposing a form of innovator liability on manufacturers for harm caused by a competitor's product. Accordingly, the supreme court vacated the decision of the court of appeals, affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the brand manufacturers and reversed in part the summary judgment for the generic manufacturer. The supreme court remanded the case for further consistent proceedings.
Wyeth, LLC to Redeem 5.500% Notes Due February 1, 2014
Nov 14 13
Pfizer Inc. announced that Wyeth LLC has notified The Bank of New York Mellon, as trustee under the applicable indenture, of its election to fully redeem all of its outstanding 5.500% Notes due February 1, 2014. The aggregate principal amount of Notes currently outstanding is $1.75 billion. The redemption date for the Notes will be December 16, 2013. The redemption price for the Notes will be a price equal to the greater of 100% of the principal amount of the Notes, or the sum, as determined by the Quotation Agent (as defined in the Global Note, the form of which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of Exhibit 4.6 to Wyeth's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (File No. 001-01225)), of the present value of the principal amount of the Notes and the remaining scheduled payments of interest on the Notes from the Redemption Date to the maturity date of the Notes, exclusive of interest accrued to the Redemption Date, discounted from their respective scheduled payment dates to the Redemption Date on a semiannual basis (assuming a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months) at the Treasury Rate (as defined in the Global Note) plus 25 basis points, plus accrued and unpaid interest on the principal amount being redeemed to (but excluding) the Redemption Date. On and after the Redemption Date, the Redemption Price will become due and payable in respect of the Notes, and interest on the Notes will cease to accrue on and after such date.
The U.S. District Court Dismiss Securities Fraud Class Action Claims Against Pfizer Inc
May 28 13
The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed securities fraud class action claims brought against a pharmaceutical firm, arising from alleged misrepresentations concerning a clinical trial conducted by its predecessor on a medication developed for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. An institutional investor sued Pfizer Inc.-as successor-in-interest to Wyeth-and certain officers of the firms, alleging the defendants violated 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleged Wyeth made misrepresentations concerning the progress of clinical trials conducted on bapineuzumab, an experimental humanized monoclonal antibody for the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Bapineuzumab was designed to clear toxic beta amyloid plaque from the brain in order to slow or prevent mental degradation. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The district court held that the defendants did not make an affirmative statement about Phase II interim data and, therefore, did not put the subject of such interim data 'in play' in a manner requiring them to completely disclose the details surrounding such data. As a result, the related allegations failed to sufficiently allege a misstatement or omission of material fact. No duty to disclose information shown. The court rejected the plaintiff's contention that positive statements concerning bapineuzumab made in a June 17, 2007 press release were misleading because they were not accompanied by disclosure of the prevalence of 'vasogenic edema among the study population or that fact that it was just one of dozens of serious problems experienced by bapineuzumab recipients, including brain bleeds. The plaintiffs similarly failed to establish that the defendants had a duty to disclose the information at issue, given the absence of a showing that the defendants made affirmative statements concerning the Phase II data. Accordingly, the district court concluded that the complaint failed to support a 10(b) claim against the defendants. After finding that the plaintiff's 20(a) control person claim could not be maintained absent a primary violation, the district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss in its entirety.
Similar Private Companies By Industry
Recent Private Companies Transactions
|No transactions available in the past 12 months.|