Co-Diagnostics (CODX) Wins Dismissal of Class Action Lawsuit

Co-Diagnostics, Inc. (Nasdaq: CODX) (the "Company" or "Co-Dx"), a molecular diagnostics company with a unique, patented platform for the development of molecular diagnostic tests, today announced that on March 4, 2025, the Securities & Governance Litigation Team at BakerHostetler, the legal firm retained to represent the Company, won complete dismissal on summary judgment of a Section 10(b) securities class action that had been pending against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Utah. See Gelt Trading, Ltd. v. Co-Diagnostics, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00368-JNP-DBP (D. Utah).

On June 15, 2020, Plaintiff Gelt Trading, Ltd. filed a securities class action against Co-Diagnostics, Inc. and certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

At issue was the Company's May 1, 2020, press release, which disclosed, among other things, that the Company's Logix Smart® COVID-19 test demonstrated "100% sensitivity and 100% specificity"—well-defined scientific metrics—across independent evaluations. Plaintiff alleged that the May 1 press release was false and/or misleading because it conveyed to investors that the Logix Smart test was "100% accurate" (i.e., perfect), allegedly causing the Company's stock price to be artificially inflated. Plaintiff alleged that this artificial inflation was removed, and investors suffered losses, when the Company's stock price dropped on May 15 following three disclosures that allegedly revealed the May 1 press release to be false ("Alleged Corrective Disclosures").

BakerHostetler was retained to replace prior counsel after the motion to dismiss was denied and the case was in the early phases of discovery. On summary judgment, BakerHostetler argued that Plaintiff could not establish any genuine issue of material fact supporting liability as to any element of its Section 10(b) claim—falsity, scienter, reliance, loss causation, or damages. BakerHostetler also argued that Plaintiff's experts' testimony—which related to clinical testing and loss causation—should be excluded on summary judgment under Daubert.

On March 4, 2025, after oral argument, the Court granted Defendants' Daubert motion to exclude the testimony of Plaintiff's loss causation expert and granted summary judgment for Defendants, concluding that Plaintiff could not demonstrate loss causation. The Court held that none of the three Alleged Corrective Disclosures actually "corrected" the May 1 press release, either because they did not discuss the Company's Logix Smart test, or because the allegedly contradictory information was long known to the market and already baked into the Company's stock price. Accordingly, Plaintiff could not establish that the May 1 press release was the cause of Plaintiff's or the class's losses. Having reached this conclusion, the Court declined to address the other summary judgment arguments or Daubert motions.

The Company regards this dismissal as a tremendous victory and is optimistic about its chances of prevailing in any appeal Plaintiff might file. The Company looks forward to putting the matter behind it, as it moves ahead with its mission of increasing the availability of high-quality molecular diagnostics on a global scale.

You May Also Be Interested In

• ABAT posts record gross profit, wins reinstatement of $57M DOE grant
• ProPetro adds dual listing on NYSE Texas exchange
• NAPC Defense completes ISO and cybersecurity compliance requirements