47 Cited authorities

Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights
551 U.S. 308 (2007) Cited 9,118 times 104 Legal Analyses
Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo
544 U.S. 336 (2005) Cited 3,548 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding that the securities statutes have a private of action “not to provide investors with broad insurance against market losses, but to protect them against those economic losses that misrepresentations actually cause”
Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.
552 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 1,318 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
Virginia Bankshares, Inc. v. Sandberg
501 U.S. 1083 (1991) Cited 609 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that § 14 liability may not be established on "mere disbelief or undisclosed motive without any demonstration that the proxy statement was false or misleading"
Novak v. Kasaks
216 F.3d 300 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 1,597 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding section 78u-4(b) does not literally require pleading of all facts, so long as facts pleaded provide adequate basis for believing statements were false
Rothman v. Gregor
220 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 1,322 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the date of the filing of the motion to amend constitutes the date the action was commenced for statute of limitations purposes" when "the plaintiff seeks to add a new defendant" (quoting Nw. Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Alberts , 769 F. Supp. 498, 510 (S.D.N.Y.1991) )
Metzler v. Corinthian
540 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 932 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding 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"
Lentell v. Merrill Lynch Co., Inc.
396 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 998 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that to prove loss causation, a plaintiff must allege "that the misstatement or omission concealed something from the market that, when disclosed, negatively affected the value of the security"
In re Flag Telecom Holdings
574 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 2009) Cited 353 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs' evidence of news events and the expert's event study did not provide sufficient evidence of causation
In re Omnicom Group
597 F.3d 501 (2d Cir. 2010) Cited 325 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the “negative characterization of already-public information” does not constitute a corrective disclosure of new information
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 345,715 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
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 38,911 times 316 Legal Analyses
Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,464 times 48 Legal Analyses
Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

Munoz v. China Expert Technology, Inc. et al

47 Cited authorities

Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

Holding that the securities statutes have a private of action “not to provide investors with broad insurance against market losses, but to protect them against those economic losses that misrepresentations actually cause”

Holding that "[m]ere conclusory allegations" about the resignations of company executives did not, without more, give rise to a strong inference of scienter

Holding that § 14 liability may not be established on "mere disbelief or undisclosed motive without any demonstration that the proxy statement was false or misleading"

Holding section 78u-4(b) does not literally require pleading of all facts, so long as facts pleaded provide adequate basis for believing statements were false

Holding that "the date of the filing of the motion to amend constitutes the date the action was commenced for statute of limitations purposes" when "the plaintiff seeks to add a new defendant" (quoting Nw. Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Alberts , 769 F. Supp. 498, 510 (S.D.N.Y.1991) )

Holding that to prove loss causation, a plaintiff must allege "that the misstatement or omission concealed something from the market that, when disclosed, negatively affected the value of the security"

Holding that plaintiffs' evidence of news events and the expert's event study did not provide sufficient evidence of causation

Holding that the “negative characterization of already-public information” does not constitute a corrective disclosure of new information

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party