Company: CORT
Filing Date: 2025-05-05
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001628280-25-022173
Chunk: 57

Company: CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS INC
Filing Date: 2025-05-05
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 8
Chunk 57
---
, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01830. A second nearly identical lawsuit was filed in December 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware by Jeweltex Pension Plan, captioned Jeweltex Pension Plan v. James N. Wilson, et al., Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-02308. These complaints named the then-existing members of our board of directors, our Chief Executive Officer and our current Chief Business Officer as defendants, and Corcept as a nominal defendant. The complaints allege breach of fiduciary duty, violation of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, insider selling, misappropriation of insider information and waste of corporate assets and seek damages in an amount to be proved at trial. These actions had been stayed pending resolution of the Melucci Litigation. On June 21, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware lifted the stays on the Williams and Jeweltex cases and consolidated these two cases into one case.

23

In January 2022, a purported shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery by Joel B. Ritchie, captioned Joel B. Ritchie v. G. Leonard Baker, et al., Case No. 2022-0102-SG. The complaint named certain members of our Board of Directors, our Chief Executive Officer, our current Chief Business Officer and our President of Corcept Endocrinology as defendants, and Corcept as nominal defendant. The complaint alleges a single cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty. The complaint seeks damages in an amount to be proved at trial. On March 22, 2024, the Court lifted a previously-entered stay, which had been pending the resolution of the Melucci Litigation, and on May 3, 2024, we filed a Motion to Dismiss this complaint. We cannot predict when the Court will rule on this motion.

Given the overlapping allegations in these shareholder derivative actions, we and the individual defendants have filed a One Forum Motion in both the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and the Delaware Court of Chancery requesting that the Courts coordinate to determine in which jurisdiction (Federal or Chancery Court) these matters should first proceed. The matters pending in the Federal Court have been stayed pending the Chancery Court’s ruling on our Motion to Dismiss.

We will respond vigorously to the above allegations but cannot predict the outcome of these matters.