Item 8. Additional Information.
Item 8 of the Schedule 14D-9 is hereby amended and supplemented by amending and restating the subsection, “Legal Proceedings” on page 62 of the Schedule 14D-9 as follows:
“As of July 20, 2020, six lawsuits have been filed by alleged Tetraphase stockholders challenging the Merger. The first lawsuit is captioned Sahan v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03069, and was filed by Herman Sahan in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Sahan complaint names as defendants Tetraphase and certain members of the Tetraphase Board. The Sahan complaint was filed on April 16, 2020. It originally challenged the Company’s proposed merger with AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The Sahan complaint was later amended on June 16, 2020 to challenge the Company’s proposed merger with Melinta Therapeutics, Inc. The Sahan complaint was amended again on July 2, 2020 to challenge the present Merger. The second lawsuit is captioned Gardner v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03352-VSB, and was filed by James Gardner in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. It originally challenged the Company’s proposed merger with AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The Gardner complaint was amended on July 15, 2020 to challenge the present Merger. The third lawsuit, a putative class action complaint, is captioned Garity v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-00956-UNA, and was filed by Edward Garity in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Garity complaint names as defendants Tetraphase, each member of the Tetraphase Board, La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company, and TTP Merger Sub, Inc. The Garity complaint was filed on July 16, 2020. The fourth lawsuit, a putative class action complaint, is captioned Plumley v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-00955-UNA, and was filed by Patrick Plumley in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Plumley complaint names as defendants Tetraphase, each member of the Tetraphase Board, La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company, and TTP Merger Sub, Inc. The Plumley complaint was filed on July 16, 2020. The fifth lawsuit is captioned Kopczynski v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03426-VSB, and was filed by Christopher Kopczynski in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Kopczynski complaint names as defendants Tetraphase and certain members of the Tetraphase Board. It originally challenged the Company’s proposed merger with AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The Kopcyznski complaint was amended on July 17, 2020 to challenge the present Merger. The sixth lawsuit is captioned Ravi v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05557, and was filed by Surya Ravi in the United State District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Ravi complaint names as defendants Tetraphase and certain members of the Tetraphase Board. The Ravi complaint was filed on July 19, 2020.
The Sahan, Gardner, Garity, Plumley, Kopczynski, and Ravi complaints allege violations of Sections 14(d)(4), 14(e), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 14d-9 promulgated thereunder. The Sahan, Gardner, Garity, Plumley, Kopczynski, and Ravi complaints generally allege that the recommendation statement on Form 14D-9, filed with the SEC on June 29, 2020, omits material information with respect to the proposed transaction, which renders such recommendation statement false and misleading. The Sahan complaint also alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duty of candor and disclosure by allegedly disseminating a materially incomplete and misleading recommendation statement in connection with the Merger.
The Sahan, Gardner, Garity, Plumley, Kopczynski, and Ravi complaints seek preliminary and permanent injunction of the proposed transaction and, if the Merger is consummated, rescission or damages. In addition, the complaints seek attorneys’ and experts’ fees and expenses.
The defendants believe that the Sahan, Gardner, Garity, Plumley, Kopczynski, and Ravi complaints are without merit.”