§Why CasetextPricing

Manindra Kumar v. Kulick and Soffa Industries, Inc.

MEMORANDUM SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 10/9/19. 10/10/19 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.

48 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,459 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,381 times   365 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,115 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

  4. Phillips v. County of Allegheny

    515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 16,801 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile

  5. Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside

    578 F.3d 203 (3d Cir. 2009)   Cited 14,075 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion "in denying a motion for a class action determination which was untimely under the local rule"

  6. In re Burlington Coat Factory

    114 F.3d 1410 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 7,643 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may consider a "document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint" when deciding a motion to dismiss

  7. Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.

    552 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 1,316 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[m]ere conclusory allegations" about the resignations of company executives did not, without more, give rise to a strong inference of scienter

  8. California Public Employees' Retirement System v. Chubb Corp.

    394 F.3d 126 (3d Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,246 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding Rule 9(b) and the PSLRA's heightened pleading requirements apply to Section 14 claims, at least where such claims are based on allegations of fraud

  9. In re Rockefeller Center Properties, Inc.

    311 F.3d 198 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 1,341 times
    Holding that a plaintiff must set forth the "who, what, when, where, and how" of the alleged fraud

  10. Southland Securities v. Inspire Ins. Solutions

    365 F.3d 353 (5th Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,145 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when determining whether a statement made by a corporation was made with scienter it is “appropriate to look to the state of mind of the individual corporate official or officials who make or issue the statement ... rather than generally to the collective knowledge of all the corporation's officers and employees”

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 345,620 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 156,056 times   193 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 90,448 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  14. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,902 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  15. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 28,253 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  16. Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices

    15 U.S.C. § 78j   Cited 12,501 times   165 Legal Analyses
    Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities

  17. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,460 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

  18. Section 78t - Liability of controlling persons and persons who aid and abet violations

    15 U.S.C. § 78t   Cited 3,981 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person "who, directly or indirectly, controls any person liable under any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder"

  19. Section 78u - Investigations and actions

    15 U.S.C. § 78u   Cited 2,256 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Exchange Act

  20. Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,194 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"