On January 4, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the Southern District of New York issued a memorandum order explaining the bases for his February 6, 2012 decision that RMBS claims brought by several investor plaintiffs against several Deutsche Bank affiliates would be dismissed, with prejudice in part and without prejudice in part. Plaintiffs allege that Deutsche Bank made misrepresentations concerning the quality of the loans underlying 43 RMBS that they purchased. Plaintiffs also allege that Deutsche Bank concealed from plaintiffs that it had taken a short position against its own RMBS, including some of the securities it sold to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs asserted claims for common law fraud, fraudulent inducement, aiding and abetting fraud, and negligent misrepresentation. Judge Rakoff held that plaintiffs failed to plead their claims with particularity, as required by Rule 9(b), in a number of ways. For instance, they failed to state with particularity the alleged misstatements in the offering documents for each of the 43 securities or who made each of those statemens. Plaintiffs also failed to allege the dates on which they purchased the securities and whether they relied on draft or final versions of the offering documents at the time of purchase. Judge Rakoff granted plaintiffs leave to amend their claims involving RMBS sponsored by Deutsche Bank. The claims related to RMBS not sponsored by Deutsche Bank, however, were dismissed with prejudice because Deutsche Bank had only a limited and attenuated role in the offerings. Order.