Lighthouse Financial Group v. The Royal Bank of Scotland Group, plc et al
MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 102 MOTION to Strike Certain Extraneous Material Cited in Defendants' Motions to Dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint.
Holding extrinsic materials were not "integral" to the complaint because the complaint "d[id] not refer to the[m]" and "plaintiffs apparently did not rely on them in drafting it"
763 F. Supp. 2d 423 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) Cited 154 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that at the motion to dismiss stage, the complaint “need not rule out all competing theories for the drop in . . . stock price; that is an issue to be determined by the trier of fact on a fully developed record”
Holding that because ratings issued by rating agencies “speak merely to the Agency's opinion of the creditworthiness of a particular security,” ratings “should be evaluated under the ‘expert’ provision of § 11, not under the ‘underwriter’ provision”
Holding that the affirmative defense, if substantively similar to that stated in Form 30, is adequately pled, and that a detailed explanation of the defense can be later presented in a Rule 12(b) motion
In Custom Vehicles, Inc. v. Forest River, Inc., 464 F.3d 725 (7th Cir. 2006), one of the parties moved to strike its opponent's statement of facts on the ground that it contained unsupported assertions of fact and misconstrued the record.
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 29,078 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."