BEVERLY, MA–(Marketwired – February 12, 2016) - Cellceutix Corporation (OTC: CTIX) (the “Company”), a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company developing innovative therapies with oncology, dermatology, anti-inflammatory and antibiotic applications, today announces that the Company’s counsel, The Ashcroft Law Firm, on Wednesday, February 10, 2016 submitted to the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, a Memorandum of Law in support of our Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint filed by The Rosen Law Firm, lead counsel to the only plaintiff in the case, Greg Zagami (as told to the court in December 2015).
The full docket of proceedings can be found at:
http://ia601507.us.archive.org/4/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.447344/gov.uscourts.nysd.447344.docket.html
As Cellceutix has previously stated, the Company considers this case to be extremely frivolous and believe the facts in the Memorandum of Law prove this contention. Cellceutix wants to better clarify how a motion to dismiss works. At this point in a case, a judge essentially accepts everything in the (Plaintiff’s) complaint as true. While the Company would like to say, “That allegation is factually not true” and provide reasons why, that is not how it’s done in a Motion to Dismiss. As the defendant, Cellceutix is tasked with providing facts that the Company and its officers did not do anything improper with respect to disclosing information, disclaimers, scienter or any other of the allegations. The Company is limited in what exhibits may be used to plead its case, primarily kept to only regulatory filings and other documents the plaintiff referenced.
Cellceutix believes that the Ashcroft Law Firm clearly and effectively conveyed the message in the Memorandum of Law and Motion to Dismiss. Cellceutix’s lead counsel, Mike Sullivan, addressed each allegation, systematically dismantling the complaint with legal precedent as to why the plaintiff’s allegations are insufficient, that Cellceutix and its officers did not make any false or misleading statements and that the allegations do not state a claim.
In short, it is Cellceutix’s contention that there are no legal grounds for the complaint and that The Rosen Law Firm has not provided factual allegations that are sufficient for the complaint to survive dismissal. As Mike Sullivan puts it, they are only trying to “create smoke.”