§Why CasetextPricing

Salhuana v. Diamond Foods, Inc. et al

MOTION to Dismiss Consolidated Complaint; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion

57 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 251,360 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. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,075 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

  3. Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo

    544 U.S. 336 (2005)   Cited 3,542 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”

  4. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano

    563 U.S. 2011 (2011)   Cited 1,333 times   53 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs had adequately pled a Rule 10b–5 claim—where defendant had disputed the sufficiency of the allegations with respect to the elements of scienter and materiality—by alleging that defendant had forestalled a stock price drop by making affirmative statements confirming the market's impression that defendant's leading product was safe, despite defendant's awareness of evidence suggesting a significant risk that the nasal spray led to loss of sense of smell; when the risk was finally (belatedly) disclosed, the stock price plummeted

  5. Navarro v. Block

    250 F.3d 729 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 5,517 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that dismissal is proper where there is "an absence of sufficient facts alleged to support a cognizable legal theory"

  6. Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.

    552 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 1,309 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

  7. Sparling v. Daou

    411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 1,282 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that scienter is an element of § 10(b) claim

  8. In re Silicon Graphics Inc.

    183 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 1,408 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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))

  9. Metzler v. Corinthian

    540 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 928 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"

  10. Garfield v. NDC Health Corp.

    466 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 654 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires

  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 344,399 times   920 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 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,818 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  13. Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices

    15 U.S.C. § 78j   Cited 12,484 times   163 Legal Analyses
    Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities

  14. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,439 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party