Filed September 20, 2013
A court should disregard “[c]onflicting pleadings that make no sense, or that would ren- der a claim incoherent, or that are contradicted either by statements in the complaint itself or by documents upon which its pleadings rely, or by facts of which the court may take judicial no- tice.” In re Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 405-06; see also, e.g., Kuriakose v. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp., 897 F. Supp. 2d 168, 185 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (concluding that a scienter theory “de- 10 See also Declaration of David E. Kovel in Support of the Exchange-Based Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s August 23, 2013 Memorandum and Order, at ¶ 3 (asserting that Plaintiff 303030 Trading LLC sold two net futures contracts on March 20, 2006, and, on December 20, 2006, both bought and sold net futures con- tracts); Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Reconsideration, at 5 (Dkt.
Filed August 3, 2010
Thus, because Ettin indisputably had knowledge of the alleged "untruths or omissions" at the time he purchased the Series 5 Securities, Plaintiffs' Securities Act claims regarding the April 2008 Offering of those securities should be dismissed. See Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 441; see also, e.g., In re Am. Int'l Group, Inc. Sec.
Filed April 19, 2010
Plaintiffs' Securities Act claims regarding the April 2008 Offering of Series 5 Securities should, therefore, be dismissed. See Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 441 (dismissing Section 11 and Section 12(a)(2) claims because plaintiffs were aware, prior to purchasing notes, that the registration statement contained misstatements); see also, e.g., In re Am. Int'l Group, Inc. Sec.
Filed April 5, 2010
In re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Sec. Litig., 151 F. Supp. 2d at 405-06; see also American Centennial Ins. Co. v. Seguros La Republica, S.A., No. 91 Civ. 1235, 1996 WL 304436, at *16 (S.D.N.Y. June 5, 1996) (“Allegations are not well pleaded if they are „made indefinite or erroneous by other allegations in the same complaint[, or] ... are contrary to facts of which the Court will take judicial notice.‟
Filed December 22, 2009
11 C. The SCAC Does Not Allege Culpable Participation In order to state a claim under section 20(a), Plaintiffs must allege facts demonstrating that CGL was in some meaningful sense a culpable participant in the alleged fraud. See In re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Sec. Litig., 151 F. Supp. 2d at 416 (holding that culpable participation is a necessary pleading requirement for a section 20(a) claim). Because the PSLRA’s heightened pleading requirements apply, in order to plead culpable participation Plaintiffs must plead with particularity “facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted with the requisite state of mind,” i.e., scienter.
Filed January 9, 2009
Thus, the Court may reject out of hand Plaintiffs’ allegations detailing the Department’s supposed “delegation of [its] accreditation powers to the Regents, which the Regents, with [the Department’s] knowledge, use to approve [Department] funds to support Columbia University’s Women’s Studies Department,” Am. Compl. ¶ 20, as “contrary to facts of which the Court will take judicial notice,” In re Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 406 (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). Moreover, regardless of which entity accredited Columbia, the Department is not responsible for the acts of a private (or state) accreditation organization simply because it conditions participation in certain grant and loan programs on such accreditation.
Filed January 25, 2016
Such conclusory allegations do not satisfy the enhanced standards of the PSLRA. Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 417. Accordingly, the securities claims against the Cerberus Defendants must be dismissed.
Filed March 1, 2013
In fact, Mr. del Missier testified that he believed the instruction that Barclays lower its LIBOR submissions emanated from the Bank of England—not from Mr. Diamond.26 Moreover, the Settlements upon which Plaintiffs rely reflect the version of events contained in Mr. del Missier’s actual testimony and not Plaintiffs’ distorted pleadings.27 Because Plaintiffs’ allegation is premised on a mischaracterization of the public record, that allegation should be rejected. In re Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 405-06, 427 (according no weight to allegations “contradicted by the very public [documents] on which [plaintiffs] rely”). 26 See Ex.
Filed August 6, 2012
And the Court is not required to “accept as truth conflicting pleadings that make no sense, or that would render a claim incoherent, or that are contradicted either by statements in the complaint itself or by documents upon which its pleadings rely, or by facts of which the court may take judicial notice.” Livent, 151 F. Supp. 2d at 405-06; see also Amidax Trading Grp. v. S.W.I.F.T. SCRL, 671 F.3d 140, 147 (2d Cir. 2011) (“[W]here a conclusory allegation in the complaint is contradicted by a document attached to the complaint, the document controls and the allegation is not accepted as true.”)
Filed February 6, 2012
Sys. of Detroit v. Safenet, Inc., 645 F. Supp. 2d 210, 241 (S.D.NY. 2009) (dismissing Section 20(a) claim for failure to plead culpable participation where plaintiff could not show that defendants “had any significant knowledge or role” in the alleged malfeasance); In re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Sec. Litig., 151 F. Supp. 2d at 436-37 (finding that culpable participation element was not satisfied because plaintiffs did not allege that outside directors participated in the fraudulent transactions at issue).9 Finally, plaintiffs’ allegations that simply lump DTTL and DTT HK together, see, e.g., ¶¶ 4, 6-8, cannot satisfy their pleading obligations. See CLAL Finance Batucha Inv.