14.   Clovis is a biopharmaceutical company focused on acquiring, developing, and  commercializing cancer treatments in the United States, Europe, and other international markets.  The Company’s development programs are targeted at specific subsets of cancer, combining  personalized medicine with companion diagnostics to direct therapeutics to those patients most  likely to benefit from them. Clovis has three product candidates in clinical development: rociletinib  (CO-1686), which is in Phase II development for the treatment of non-small cell lunch cancer;  recaparib, which is in Phase II and Phase III clinical trials for the treatment of ovarian cancer; and  lucitanib, which is in Phase II clinical trials for the treatment of breast and lung cancers. Clovis  has received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for rociletinib and rucaparib. The  Company maintains global rights to rociletinib and rucaparib, and U.S. and Japanese rights to  lucitanib.   16.  Data from TIGER-X, combined with data from TIGER-2, were submitted by the  Company as the basis of NDA and MAA submissions for rociletinib.    17.  Throughout the Class Period, Clovis has misrepresented the nature of the TIGER  program’s results.   The Material Misrepresentations and Omissions   29.  Plaintiff brings this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules  of Civil Procedure on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Clovis common  stock during the Class Period (the “Class”). Excluded from the Class are Defendants and their  families, the officers and directors of the Company, at all relevant times, members of their  immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, and any entity in  which Defendants have or had a controlling interest.   30.  The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is  impracticable, since Clovis has millions of shares of stock outstanding and because the Company’s  shares were actively traded on the NASDAQ.  As of October 30, 2015, Clovis had more than 38  million shares issued and outstanding. While the exact number of Class members in unknown to  Plaintiff at this time and can only be ascertained through appropriate discovery, Plaintiff believes  that there are thousands of members in the proposed Class and that they are geographically  dispersed.   32.  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of those of the Class because Plaintiff and the Class  sustained damages from Defendants’ wrongful conduct in a substantially identical manner.   33.  Plaintiff will adequately protect the interests of the Class and has retained counsel  who are experienced in class action securities litigation. Plaintiff has no interests which conflict  with those of the Class.   35.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every preceding paragraph as though  fully set forth herein.    36.  This Count is asserted by Plaintiff on behalf of himself and the Class against all  Defendants and is based upon Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule  10b-5, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5, promulgated thereunder.   37.  During the Class Period, Defendants carried out a plan, scheme, and course of  conduct that was intended to and, throughout the Class Period, did: (i) deceive the investing public,  including Plaintiff and other Class members, as alleged herein; (ii) artificially inflate and maintain  the market price of Clovis’s common stock; and (iii) cause Plaintiff and other members of the  Class to purchase or otherwise acquire Clovis’s common stock at artificially inflated prices. In  furtherance of this unlawful scheme, plan, and course of conduct, the Defendants, and each of  them, took the actions set forth herein.   39.  As a result of their making and/or their substantial participation in the creation of  affirmative statements and reports to the investing public, Defendants had a duty to promptly  disseminate truthful information that would be material to investors in compliance with the  integrated disclosure provisions of the SEC, as embodied in SEC Regulation S-K (17 C.F.R. §  229.10, et seq.) and other SEC regulations, including accurate and truthful information with respect  to the Company’s operations and performance so that the market prices of the Company’s publicly  traded securities would be based on truthful, complete, and accurate information.  Defendants’  material misrepresentations and omissions as set forth herein violated that duty.   40.  Defendants engaged in the fraudulent activity described above knowingly and  intentionally or in such a reckless manner as to constitute willful deceit and fraud upon Plaintiff  and the Class.  Defendants knowingly or recklessly caused their reports and statements to contain  misstatements and omissions of material fact as alleged herein.     41.  As a result of Defendants’ fraudulent activity, the market price of Clovis common  stock was artificially inflated during the Class Period.   42.  In ignorance of the true financial condition of Clovis, Plaintiff and other members  of the Class, relying on the integrity of the market and/or on the statements and reports of Clovis  containing the misleading information, purchased or otherwise acquired Clovis’s common stock  at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.   44.  Throughout the Class Period, Defendants were aware of material non-public  information concerning Clovis’s fraudulent conduct (including the false and misleading statements  described herein). Throughout the Class Period, Defendants willfully and knowingly concealed  this adverse information, and Plaintiff’s and the Class’s losses were the foreseeable consequence  of Defendants’ concealment of this information.   45.  As a direct and proximate cause of the Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiff and  other members of the Class suffered damages in connection with their respective purchases and  sales of Clovis common stock during the Class Period.  46.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference and realleges each and every allegation above as  though fully set forth herein.   48.  Mahaffy was involved in drafting, producing, reviewing and/or disseminating the  materially false and misleading statements complained of herein. Mahaffy was aware (or  recklessly disregarded) that materially false and misleading statements were being issued by the  Company and nevertheless approved, ratified, and/or failed to correct those statements, in violation  of federal securities laws.  Throughout the Class Period, Mahaffy was able to, and did, control the  contents of the Company’s SEC filings, reports, press releases, and other public statements.  Mahaffy was provided with copies of, reviewed and approved, and/or signed such filings, reports,  releases and other statements prior to or shortly after their issuance and had the ability or  opportunity to prevent their issuance or to cause them to be corrected.   50.  Mahaffy acted as a controlling person of Clovis within the meaning of Section 20(a)  of the Exchange Act. By reason of his position with the Company, Mahaffy had the power and  authority to cause Clovis to engage in the wrongful conduct complained of herein. Mahaffy  controlled Clovis and all of its employees. As alleged above, Clovis is a primary violator of Section  10(b) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5.  By reason of his conduct, Mahaffy is liable  pursuant to section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.   51.  As a direct and proximate result of the wrongful conduct of Clovis and Mahaffy,  Plaintiff and members of the Class suffered damages in connection with their respective purchases  and sales of the Company’s common stock during the Class Period.  Background    Violation of Section 10(b) of   the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5  (Against All Defendants)   Violation of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act  (Against Mahaffy)  