Supreme Court Holds Securities Fraud Class Certification Does Not Require Showing Of Materiality, With Strong Dissents Questioning The Fraud-On-The-Market Theory

by Perkins Coie

In its long-awaited decision in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, No. 11-1085 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court held that plaintiffs in a securities-fraud class action do not need to establish the materiality of alleged misrepresentations in seeking class certification.

Courts May Presume Marketwide Reliance Without Addressing Materiality to Certify a Securities Class

Securities-fraud claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 require proof of six elements, including that plaintiffs relied on a material misrepresentation or omission. In Basic Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988), the Supreme Court created a rebuttable presumption of reliance that applies to all members of a class if the named plaintiffs show that statements containing the alleged misrepresentations or omissions were publicly known and that the securities at issue traded in an efficient market. 

In Amgen, the Supreme Court acknowledged that materiality is a predicate for application of the fraud-on-the-market theory, but held that securities-fraud plaintiffs can satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)'s predominance requirement without first establishing materiality.  Writing for the 6-3 majority, Justice Ginsburg reasoned that because materiality is determined based on an objective "reasonable investor" standard, it is not necessary to inquire whether each member of the proposed class found the misrepresentation or omission material, and that it is sufficient to determine whether a statement is material on the merits at the summary judgment or trial stage.  Consistent with this determination, the Court also held that trial courts should not consider evidence intended to rebut a potential finding of materiality in deciding whether to apply the fraud-on-the-market presumption at the class certification stage.

The Court found it significant that materiality is an independent element of a securities-fraud claim that must eventually be established on the merits or else the entire claim will fail.  In contrast, failure to prove the predicates of market efficiency and publicity at the class certification stage would merely preclude use of the rebuttable presumption of reliance, leaving members of the proposed class the option of seeking relief for their claims by individually proving reliance.

Four Justices Suggest Fraud-on-the-Market Theory Should Be Re-Evaluated

The majority's refusal to treat materiality like other fraud-on-the-market predicates drew sharp criticism from other members of the Court.  As Justice Thomas pointed out in his dissent (joined in full by Justice Kennedy and in part by Justice Scalia), distinguishing materiality on grounds that it (as opposed to publicity and market efficiency) must be proven at a later "merits" stage of the proceedings is tantamount to admitting that the parties (and the court) will not know at the class certification stage whether reliance is an individual or common question.  And if one does not know whether reliance is an individual or common question, any decision to certify (or not to certify) a class necessarily is subject to question. 

The dissenting opinions of Justices Scalia and Thomas and the concurring opinion of Justice Alito also show that at least four members of the Court harbor skepticism about the validity of the fraud-on-the-market theory and are open to abandoning it.  Justice Scalia observed that the Amgen majority "does not merely accept what some consider the regrettable consequences of the four-Justice opinion in Basic; it expands those consequences from the arguably regrettable to the unquestionably disastrous."  Justice Alito was even more explicit in inviting a direct challenge to Basic, stating that "recent evidence suggest[ing] that the presumption may rest on a faulty economic premise" signals that "reconsideration of the Basic presumption may be appropriate."

A Pyrrhic Victory for Plaintiffs?

The Court's opinion in Amgen should be viewed as a pro-plaintiff decision as it forecloses a potential challenge to the certification of a Rule 23(b)(3) class in a securities-fraud action.  However, to the extent the dissenting and concurring opinions foreshadow a possible abandonment by the Court of the fraud-on-the-market theory, the real winners may turn out to be corporate defendants who, if accused of engaging in securities fraud, would have a potent new weapon in their arsenal to defeat efforts to certify a class.

Written by:

Perkins Coie

Perkins Coie on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.