Relmada, a pharmaceutical company known for its development of the drugs d-Methadone (REL-1017) and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA), has issued a temporary restraining order against Laidlaw & Company and its principals, Matthew Eitner and James Ahern. Relmada found that the principals were disseminating test materials they had not approved for the use of Laidlaw, and successfully took the firm to court to enjoin Eitner and Ahern for committing this crime.
After this incident, Laidlaw asserted that Relmada was not doing enough to secure international investors to assuage their “financial shortfall”. This was an entirely false statement, as Relmada, like most bio-pharmaceutical companies, indeed boasts a progressive portfolio of drug development and their funding is far from scant. Along with this nonsense, Laidlaw insisted Relmada’s board of directors was at a “lack of expertise”, and presented plans for a new board. Anyone who thinks Relmada’s directors were somehow lacking expertise is either being willfully ignorant or foolish; board members include 20, 30, even 40 year veterans of the industry who had worked with Hoffman-LaRoche, Abbott and Johnson & Johnson. It’s plain to see from their conniving legal tactics and dishonest, underhanded deal-making who and what Laidlaw really is.
On December 11, 2015–the day the courts issued a restraining order against Laidlaw– Relmada’s Chief Executive Officer Sergio Traversa expressed his concern that the interests of Laidlaw and its principals were distinct from the interests of Relmada’s other stockholders. Likely little known to Relmada and its associates, Laidlaw already had a history of flouncing U.S. financial regulations–the firm’s past is dotted with regulatory sanctions, monetary penalties and customer service complaints. Thankfully the courts have been in favor of Relmada from the very beginning, and its doubtful that outcomes will be very different in Relmada’s future trysts with the Laidlaw firm.