9 Cited authorities

Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors
266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 5,273 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that unwarranted inferences are insufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss
Janus Capital Group Inc. v. First Derivative Traders
564 U.S. 135 (2011) Cited 586 times 104 Legal Analyses
Holding that a mutual fund adviser may not be found liable for a mutual fund's violation of SEC Rule 10b–5, in part because of “the narrow scope that [courts] must give the implied private right of action”
School District No. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc.
5 F.3d 1255 (9th Cir. 1993) Cited 4,928 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "overwhelming weight of authority is that the failure to file documents in an original motion or opposition does not turn the late filed documents into 'newly discovered evidence'" for a motion for reconsideration
389 Orange Street Partners v. Arnold
179 F.3d 656 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,499 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "vague claims" cannot generate a factual dispute "adequate to defeat summary judgment"
Howard v. Everex Systems
228 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 488 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding outside directors responsible for SEC filings they signed
S.E.C. v. PHAN
500 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 260 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court erred in disregarding declarations as “uncorroborated and self-serving”
In re Software Toolworks Inc.
50 F.3d 615 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 204 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding summary judgment on 10b-5 claim to be improper, even in absence of direct evidence of fraudulent intent, where evidence permitted a "reasonable inference" of scienter
S.E.C. v. Wolfson
539 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2008) Cited 108 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a defendant's ability to challenge the sufficiency of a complaint had "passed" because he "never raised any objections to the complaint or otherwise sought a more particular statement of the allegations against him until two years after the complaint was filed and months after the parties had moved for summary judgment"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Pimco Advisors Fund Management LLC
341 F. Supp. 2d 454 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) Cited 45 times
Finding that even if the undisclosed transaction "was not strictly prohibited by the alleged disclosures," defendants' statements were misleading when the "disclosures [] could easily [have] be[en] read" as prohibiting the undisclosed transaction

Securities And Exchange Commission v. Daifotis et al

9 Cited authorities

Holding that unwarranted inferences are insufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss

Holding that a mutual fund adviser may not be found liable for a mutual fund's violation of SEC Rule 10b–5, in part because of “the narrow scope that [courts] must give the implied private right of action”

Holding that the "overwhelming weight of authority is that the failure to file documents in an original motion or opposition does not turn the late filed documents into 'newly discovered evidence'" for a motion for reconsideration

Holding that "vague claims" cannot generate a factual dispute "adequate to defeat summary judgment"

Holding outside directors responsible for SEC filings they signed

Holding that the district court erred in disregarding declarations as “uncorroborated and self-serving”

Holding summary judgment on 10b-5 claim to be improper, even in absence of direct evidence of fraudulent intent, where evidence permitted a "reasonable inference" of scienter

Finding that even if the undisclosed transaction "was not strictly prohibited by the alleged disclosures," defendants' statements were misleading when the "disclosures [] could easily [have] be[en] read" as prohibiting the undisclosed transaction