On August 14, 2026, Weil secured a significant victory for Elanco Animal Health when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit unanimously affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of a securities class action alleging that Elanco misled investors about the sources of its revenue growth. In a published decision, the Seventh Circuit developed new precedent on scienter and the application of Rule 9(b) in securities class actions.

The lawsuit alleged that Elanco’s statements regarding product demand and business growth were misleading because the company failed to disclose certain inventory and distributor sales practices that plaintiffs characterized as “channel stuffing.” Weil represented Elanco from the outset of the litigation, first securing dismissal with prejudice in the district court.

Following briefing and oral argument the Seventh Circuit dismissed all claims, bringing the litigation to a close. The court held that plaintiffs failed to adequately allege that Elanco intended to mislead investors, finding that there were competing nonfraudulent explanations for the company’s conduct.

The decision reinforces important protections for public companies facing securities claims based on hindsight critiques of business practices. The Seventh Circuit’s ruling confirms that allegations concerning inventory and sales practices, without sufficient facts supporting fraudulent intent, are insufficient to proceed. It also establishes new circuit precedent on when class action plaintiffs must satisfy the heightened pleading standards of Rule 9(b).

Complex Commercial Litigation Co-Head Greg Silbert and Complex Commercial Litigation partner Josh Wesneski represented Elanco, and Silbert argued the appeal.