UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
SCHEDULE 14A
(Rule 14a-101)
INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT
SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION
Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Amendment No. )
Filed by the Registrant ☒ Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ☐
Check the appropriate box:
| ☐ | Preliminary Proxy Statement |
| ☐ | Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) |
| ☐ | Definitive Proxy Statement |
| ☒ | Definitive Additional Materials |
| ☐ | Soliciting Material Pursuant to Rule 14a-12 |
MYLAN N.V.
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):
| ☒ | No fee required. |
| ☐ | Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. |
| (1) | Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: |
| (2) | Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: |
| (3) | Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): |
| (4) | Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: |
| (5) | Total fee paid: |
| ☐ | Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. |
| ☐ | Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. |
| (1) | Amount Previously Paid: |
| (2) | Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: |
| (3) | Filing Party: |
| (4) | Date Filed: |
| June 7, 2017
Institutional Shareholder Services 702 King Farm Boulevard, Suite 400 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Attention: Kathy Cohen |
|
Dear Kathy:
Thank you Kathy, and thank you for your prompt response. We look forward to receiving your report and continuing our dialogue.
| Wendy Cameron Non-Executive Director |
JoEllen Dillon Non-Executive Director | |
| Neil Dimick Non-Executive Director |
Mark Parrish Non-Executive Director | |
June 7, 2017
Wendy Cameron, Non-Executive Director
JoEllen Dillon, Non-Executive Director
Neil Dimick, Non-Executive Director
Mark Parrish, Non-Executive Director
c/o Ken Parks, Chief Financial Officer (via email at ken.parks@mylan.com)
Mylan N.V., Building 4
Trident Place
Mosquito Way
Hatfield
Hertfordshire
AL10 9UL
United Kingdom
Dear Mss. Cameron and Dillon and Messrs. Dimick and Parrish:
I’m writing in response to your June 6 letter and, in particular, to your request that ISS reconsider whether to provide Mylan with a draft of the ISS report on Mylan’s upcoming meeting. ISS has established policies regarding the provision of draft research reports to issuers prior to publication. These policies are available on our public website and are well-known by market participants such as Mylan.
To reiterate what we discussed in our meeting, the provision of a draft to any issuer is always at the discretion of ISS and one of the express policy provisions is that ISS does not normally allow pre-publication reviews of any analysis relating to any special meeting or any meeting where the agenda includes a merger or acquisition proposal, proxy fight, or any item that ISS, in its sole discretion, considers to be of a contentious or controversial nature. A public “vote no” campaign aimed at sitting board members transforms the uncontested election of directors into a “contentious” ballot item. As such, an investor-driven “vote no” campaign precludes pre-publication review of the draft research report by the targeted corporate issuer. Notably, the policy does not require a full blown “proxy contest” or the solicitation of proxies by the party conducting the “vote no” campaign. Moreover, the provisions governing the draft review process, which Mylan acknowledged when it registered for the program in January 2015, expressly identify “vote no” campaigns as a specific example of the type of contentious situation for which a pre-publication review of the draft would not be available.
The policies I’ve described are intended to safeguard the independence of our research process and recommendations. As we are sure you would agree, preserving the integrity and independence of our proxy research is critical, not only for our clients but for all market participants. At the same time, you correctly note the importance of presenting our clients with correct and complete information. In that regard, the report we issue in connection with Mylan’s upcoming meeting will be prepared consistent with our established policy guidelines and subject to the quality assurance procedures which we employ for all of our reports in keeping with our on-going commitment to provide our clients with high-quality, accurate and independent research.
We appreciate the further information in your letter regarding Mr. Coury’s continuing role with Mylan and your perspective on Mylan’s interactions with Teva. This information has been provided to the analysts who will be preparing the report.
We understand that you have filed with the SEC your June 6 letter as additional proxy soliciting materials. If you think it would be appropriate and/or useful, you have our permission to make this letter available to your shareholders.
We too look forward to our continuing dialogue with Mylan.
Regards,
Kathryn Cohen
Associate Director, Head of Research Helpdesk
| cc: | Gary Retelny, President and CEO |