AI Washing: Simple Guidance to Avoid Risk
Tech Debt is Common. What does it mean for IPO readiness from a cybersecurity perspective?
Episode 332 -- Deep Dive into SEC’s Internal Controls and Cybersecurity Settlement with R&R Donnelly
Mitigating Political-Law Risk
The Preferred Return Podcast | AIFMD II – Implementation Begins
Why ESG Matters?
Meeting the Proposed SEC Climate Disclosure Requirements
California Regulation of Charitable Fundraising Platforms Part 2 - Reporting Due Diligence, Recordkeeping, and Disclosure Rules
ESG Masterclass — ESG and Impact Investing
The Justice Insiders Podcast - Human Beings: Cybersecurity's Most Fragile Attack Surface
JONES DAY TALKS®: Court Grants Stay on SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rule, but Companies Should Continue Preparations
ESG Masterclass — ESG and Politics
Ad Law Tool Kit Show – Episode 5 – Surviving an FTC Investigation
SEC’s New Cyber Rules for Publicly Traded Companies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
PLI's inSecurities Podcast - Commissioner Uyeda on “the Perils of Regulation by Theory and Hypothesis”
PLI's inSecurities Podcast - Addressing the “Netflix Problem” in Securities Regulation
What Nonprofit Leaders Need To Know About the Corporate Transparency Act
December 1st Deadline to Adopt Executive Compensation Clawback Policies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
How to Fix the Cyber Incident Reporting Mess--DHS Weighs In
ESG Essentials: What You Need To Know Now - Episode 16 - ESG Backlash
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., unanimously held that pure omissions cannot form the basis of a securities fraud claim under Rule 10b-5(b) of the Securities...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, that “pure omissions” made in required disclosures do not...more
The United States Supreme Court in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165, ruled that a corporation is not liable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 for...more
A company cannot be sued by private parties under Rule 10b-5(b) for a “pure omission” but can be liable for omissions that render other statements misleading. “Pure omissions” cannot be attacked in private 10b-5(b)...more
In a unanimous decision, the US Supreme Court held that pure omissions are not actionable under Rule 10b-5(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Rather, the Court found that Rule 10b–5(b) prohibits half-truths, not...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that pure silence in MD&A statements are not actionable in shareholder securities fraud cases. The case is important for issuers and shareholders alike for several reasons: -...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has now resolved the split in lower courts, discussed in our March 14, 2024 post, over whether plaintiffs may bring a securities fraud claim based solely on a corporation’s omission from public filings...more
SEC Rule 10b-5(b) makes it unlawful for issuers to make false statements or “to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made...not misleading.” In addition to ensuring the truth of statements,...more
On June 18, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Leidos v. Indiana Public Retirement System, a securities case that raised important and unsettled issues about the scope of liability under Section 10(b) of the Securities...more
Resolution of whether Item 303 of Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-K creates an affirmative duty to disclose and a private right of enforcement under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 will have to wait. On...more
In less than a month, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Leidos, Inc. v. Indiana Public Retirement System (Docket No. 16-581). The question presented in Leidos is...more