EQS-News: ROSEN, A GLOBALLY RESPECTED LAW FIRM, Encourages BioVie Inc. Investors with Losses to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action - BIVI

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants made materially false and/or misleading because they misrepresented and failed to disclose the following adverse facts pertaining to BioVie’s business, operations and prospects, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic caused “limited access” to clinical trial sites, significantly affecting BioVie’s ability to conduct proper oversight of the clinical trial; (2) due to the “limited access” to the clinical trial sites, the trial was at higher risk of having “significant deviation from protocol and Good Clinical Practice (GCP) violations” and “anomalous data;” (3) BioVie was experiencing issues with the contact research organizations it had retained, creating greater risk of the trial being in non-compliance with GCPs; (4) BioVie had identified “higher than expected levels of deviations” in the data; (5) due to a “highly unusual level of suspected improprieties” there was a heightened risk a majority of the clinical trial subjects would be excluded; (6) as a result of the exclusions, there was a heightened material risk that the clinical trial would “not achieve statistical significance;” and (7) as a result of the foregoing, statements about BioVie’s business, operations, prospects, and/or compliance with good GCP were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.