Waterford Township General Employees Retirement System v. Bankunited Financial Corporation et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 67 Amended Complaint, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, 86 MOTION to Dismiss 67 Amended Complaint, MOTION to Dismiss 67 Amended Complaint, MOTION to Dismiss 67 Amended Complaint, Lead Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants' Motions to Dismiss the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint

8 Cited authorities

Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights
551 U.S. 308 (2007) Cited 9,348 times 105 Legal Analyses
Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
Bryant v. Avado Brands, Inc.
187 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,301 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that “a court, when considering a motion to dismiss in a securities fraud case, may take judicial notice . . . of relevant public documents required to be filed with the SEC”
Garfield v. NDC Health Corp.
466 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2006) Cited 683 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires
Mizzaro v. Home Depot
544 F.3d 1230 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 384 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiffs failed to allege scienter because, in part, the "amended complaint affords no basis for inferring that the individual defendants would have heard about these whistleblower complaints during the class period"
Rosenberg v. Gould
554 F.3d 962 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 249 times
Holding that plaintiffs cannot amend their complaint through a response to a motion to dismiss
In re Global Crossing, Ltd.
322 F. Supp. 2d 319 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) Cited 159 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that in the absence of a "primary violation" of the Exchange Act by the controlled entity, there can be no "control person" liability
In re Countrywide Financial Corp. Securities Litigation
588 F. Supp. 2d 1132 (C.D. Cal. 2008) Cited 107 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding complaint persuasively alleges that "systematic changes in Countrywide came from the top down and pervaded virtually every office" because directors and officers allegedly were regularly provided "detailed exception statistics"
Clark v. City of Oswego
5:03-CV-202 (NAM/DEP) (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2006) Cited 3 times
5:03-CV-202 (NAM/DEP). March 26, 2006 PHILLIP G. STECK, ESQ., BRIAN W. MATULA, ESQ., COOPER ERVING SAVAGE, LLP, Albany, New York, Attorneys for Plaintiff. SCOTT J. DELCONTE, ESQ., JOHN D. ALLEN, ESQ., BOND, SCHOENECK KING, PLLC, Oswego, New York, Attorneys for Defendants. MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER NORMAN MORDUE, District Judge Currently before the Court is defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint in its entirety and with prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of

Waterford Township General Employees Retirement System v. Bankunited Financial Corporation et al

8 Cited authorities

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

Holding that “a court, when considering a motion to dismiss in a securities fraud case, may take judicial notice . . . of relevant public documents required to be filed with the SEC”

Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires

Holding that the plaintiffs failed to allege scienter because, in part, the "amended complaint affords no basis for inferring that the individual defendants would have heard about these whistleblower complaints during the class period"

Holding that plaintiffs cannot amend their complaint through a response to a motion to dismiss

Holding that in the absence of a "primary violation" of the Exchange Act by the controlled entity, there can be no "control person" liability

Holding complaint persuasively alleges that "systematic changes in Countrywide came from the top down and pervaded virtually every office" because directors and officers allegedly were regularly provided "detailed exception statistics"