Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights
551 U.S. 308 (2007) Cited 9,187 times 104 Legal AnalysesHolding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.
552 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 1,329 times 7 Legal AnalysesHolding that "[m]ere conclusory allegations" about the resignations of company executives did not, without more, give rise to a strong inference of scienter
In re Silicon Graphics Inc.
183 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,415 times 8 Legal AnalysesHolding that stock sales of individual defendants are only indicative of scienter where they are "dramatically out of line with prior trading practices" (quoting In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig., 886 F.2d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 1989))
Metzler v. Corinthian
540 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 935 times 5 Legal AnalysesHolding that plaintiffs failed to plead loss causation where plaintiffs' theory was that "Corinthian's fraud was revealed to the market, causing Metzler's losses" but "[t]he TAC does not allege that the June 24 and August 2 announcements disclosed—or even suggested—[the fraudulent activities] to the market"
Phillips v. LCI International, Inc.
190 F.3d 609 (4th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,119 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that “a court may consider [a document attached to a motion to dismiss] in determining whether to dismiss the complaint [when] it was integral to and explicitly relied on in the complaint and [when] the plaintiffs do not challenge its authenticity.”
Neubronner v. Milken
6 F.3d 666 (9th Cir. 1993) Cited 793 timesHolding that Rule 9(b)'s purpose is "to prevent the filing of a complaint as a pretext for the discovery of unknown wrongs" and finding the Section 20A insufficiently pled because it lacked "facts [such] as the times, dates, places" or "allegations on information and belief . . . [to] state the factual basis for the belief"
Ronconi v. Larkin
253 F.3d 423 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 517 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that complaint did not sufficiently plead falsity where it alleged that defendant made false statements about earnings and sales expectations and that defendant stated that plan to cut jobs and costs was “on track,” but complaint did not allege facts showing that defendant knew at the time that the predictions were inaccurate
Lipton v. Pathogenesis Corp.
284 F.3d 1027 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 475 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that a plaintiff alleging securities fraud by relying on a company's internal reporting must do more than identify certain "negative" reports
Howard v. Everex Systems
228 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 481 times 7 Legal AnalysesHolding outside directors responsible for SEC filings they signed
South Ferry v. Killinger
542 F.3d 776 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 377 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that “detailed and specific allegations about management's exposure to factual information within the company” support an inference of scienter
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 348,148 times 929 Legal AnalysesGranting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,494 times 49 Legal AnalysesGranting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party
Section 78u-5 - Application of safe harbor for forward-looking statements
15 U.S.C. § 78u-5 Cited 1,262 times 21 Legal AnalysesListing as an exclusion from the safe harbor "forward-looking statement in connection with a going private transaction"