On April 18, 2025, Judge André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California granted a motion to dismiss a putative class action asserting claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the...more
On March 31, 2025, Judge Arun Subramanian of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied a motion to dismiss a putative securities class action against a cosmetics company (the “Company”),...more
On February 3, 2025, in In re Shanda Games Limited Securities Litigation, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, allowed a putative investor class to proceed with securities fraud claims under...more
On March 24, 2025, Judge Rita F. Lin of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss a putative class action against a technology company (the...more
On February 26, 2025, Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald of the United States District Court for the Central District of California granted a motion to dismiss a putative class action against a producer of plant-based meat...more
On February 26, 2025, Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas, sitting by designation in the District Court for the District of Delaware, granted a motion for summary judgment in a securities action brought by an investment firm...more
On January 16, 2025, Judge Trina L. Thompson of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted a motion to dismiss a securities action asserting claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the...more
On January 23, 2025, Judge James C. Dever III of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina dismissed a putative securities class action against an auto parts retailer (the “Company”) and...more
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank (S. Ct. Case No. 22-15077). As presented by Facebook (now known as Meta Platforms, Inc.), the question for the court is as...more
The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in two cases concerning the pleading standard in securities fraud class actions....more
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., unanimously held that pure omissions cannot form the basis of a securities fraud claim under Rule 10b-5(b) of the Securities...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, that “pure omissions” made in required disclosures do not...more
The United States Supreme Court in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165, ruled that a corporation is not liable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 for...more
The Supreme Court recently took away an often-used weapon by shareholder plaintiffs in securities fraud cases, ruling that “pure omissions” from periodic SEC filings (absent any other duty to disclose) are not actionable...more
A company cannot be sued by private parties under Rule 10b-5(b) for a “pure omission” but can be liable for omissions that render other statements misleading. “Pure omissions” cannot be attacked in private 10b-5(b)...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court limited an issuer's liability for securities fraud claims based on alleged omissions in SEC filings. The Court's unanimous decision in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. et al v. Moab...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that pure silence in MD&A statements are not actionable in shareholder securities fraud cases. The case is important for issuers and shareholders alike for several reasons: -...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision in the case of Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165. Justice Sotomayor, writing for a unanimous Court, ruled that “pure...more
On April 12, in a long-awaited and pivotal decision, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that private plaintiffs may not plead a federal securities fraud claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934...more
SEC Rule 10b-5(b) makes it unlawful for issuers to make false statements or “to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made...not misleading.” In addition to ensuring the truth of statements,...more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation v. Moab Partners, L.P., held that omissions of supposedly material information allegedly required to be disclosed under Item 303 of SEC Regulation S-K...more
On July 15, 2022, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in an interlocutory appeal the SEC had brought seeking to expand the scope of...more
On November 24, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a pair of decisions addressing threshold requirements for securities fraud claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and...more
Northern District of California Dismisses Traders’ Suit Against Bitmex Crypto Exchange with Prejudice; Delaware Supreme Court Upholds Chancery Court Ruling That Stockholder Appraisal Rights Can Be Waived by Contract;...more