SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): May 4, 2000
LIFECELL CORPORATION
________________________________________________________________________________
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)
Delaware 01-19890 76-0172936
________________________________________________________________________________
(State or Other Jurisdiction (Commission (IRS Employer
of Incorporation) File Number) Identification No.)
One Millenium Way, Branchburg, New Jersey 08876
________________________________________________________________________________
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (908) 947-1100
<PAGE>
Item 5. Other Events.
1. Class Action. On May 4, 2000, a Complaint was filed in the
Superior Court of California, San Bernadino County, Central District, captioned
Ann Regner et. al., on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, v.
Inland Eye & Tissue Bank of Redlands, et. al. The Complaint is styled as a class
action on behalf of all close family members of those deceased persons whose
tissues were collected, processed, stored or distributed in California. The
defendants, 19 of whom are named, are the class of all licensed tissue banks in
California as well as other companies, including LifeCell, which store, process,
or distribute human tissue as part of their business. The Complaint alleges that
tissue banks routinely fail to obtain proper informed consent from family
members when soliciting the donation of human tissue for transplant. The
Complaint also alleges that the defendants, including LifeCell, make profits
from the storing, processing, and distribution of human tissue in contravention
of California law. Plaintiffs' application for a preliminary injunction seeking
to enjoin the defendants, including LifeCell, from doing business in California
was recently denied. LifeCell does not believe the claims are meritorious, is
vigorously defending such action, and has filed a motion to dismiss the
Complaint.
2. Advertising Litigation. On June 7, 2000, a Complaint was filed in
the United States District Court, District of New Jersey entitled Inamed
Corporation, McGhan Medical Corporation and Collagen Aesthetics, Inc. vs.
LifeCell Corporation and Obagi Medical Products Inc. The Complaint alleges that
LifeCell and Obagi, its marketing agent, have disseminated false advertisements
with respect to the marketing of LifeCell's Cymetra product that misleadingly
compares it to and unlawfully disparages the bovine collagen products of Inamed
and its subsidiaries. The plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief to prohibit
what they allege to be such unlawful advertising, as well as unspecified
damages. A hearing on plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction was
recently held and the motion is under consideration. LifeCell does not believe
the claims are meritorious and is vigorously defending such action.
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
LIFECELL CORPORATION
By: /s/Steven Sobieski
_____________________
Steven Sobieski
Vice President, Finance
and Chief Financial Officer
Dated: July 7, 2000
