News & Analysis as of

Rule 10(b) Rule 10b-5 Supreme Court of the United States

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court: Pure Omissions Cannot Support Rule 10b-5(b) Liability

McDermott Will & Emery on

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously held in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. that pure omissions are not actionable under Rule 10b-5(b), promulgated by the US Securities...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Supreme Court narrows scope of omissions liability under the Securities Exchange Act

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split and limited the scope of omissions liability under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5(b). The decision will limit the scope of...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split and Holds ‘Pure Omissions’ Outside Reach of Section 10(b) Liability

On April 12, a unanimous Supreme Court held in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P. that material omissions are actionable under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and its enabling SEC Rule 10b-5 only if the...more

Cooley LLP

US Supreme Court: Pure Omissions Not Actionable UnderRule 10b-5(b)

Cooley LLP on

On April 12, 2024, the US Supreme Court reversed the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s decision in Macquarie v. Moab Partners and held that a pure omission cannot form the basis of a securities fraud claim under...more

Cooley LLP

US Supreme Court: Pure Omissions Not Actionable Under Rule 10b-5(b)

Cooley LLP on

On April 12, 2024, the US Supreme Court reversed the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s decision in Macquarie v. Moab Partners and held that a pure omission cannot form the basis of a securities fraud claim under...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

SCOTUS Ruling: Pure Omissions Are Not Actionable Under Rule 10b-5

On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision in the case of Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165. Justice Sotomayor, writing for a unanimous Court, ruled that “pure...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

SCOTUS Unanimously Resolves Securities Fraud Circuit Split

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that, in the absence of an otherwise misleading statement, a failure to disclose information required by Item 303 of Regulation S-K (“Item 303”) does not support a...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

U.S. Supreme Court: "Pure" Omissions Are Not Actionable Under Rule 10b-5

Amundsen Davis LLC on

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. et al v. Moab Partners, L.P., et al. which held that omissions, by themselves, are not subject to private rights...more

Goodwin

Supreme Court Rejects Securities Lawsuit Based On “Pure Omission” From SEC Filings

Goodwin on

In a narrow but potentially significant decision, the Supreme Court has held that securities-fraud plaintiffs cannot recover based on a “pure omission” from a company’s public statements under the most common legal basis for...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

Supreme Court Rejects 'Pure Omissions” Liability Under Rule 10b-5

On April 12, a unanimous Supreme Court held that issuers are not liable under Rule 10b-5(b) for “pure omissions.” The Court’s decision ends a long-standing circuit split and, most importantly for public companies, narrows the...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Supreme Court Underscores Limited Applicability of Rule 10b-5(b) Omissions Claims

Epstein Becker & Green on

In Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165, 601 U.S. ___ (April 12, 2024), the United States Supreme Court held that “pure omissions are not actionable” for securities fraud asserted specifically...more

Paul Hastings LLP

Supreme Court Rules Pure Omissions Not Actionable under Rule 10b-5

Paul Hastings LLP on

On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165, 601 U.S. __ (Apr. 12, 2024), in which the Court held that pure omissions are not actionable...more

Morgan Lewis

US Supreme Court Holds ‘Pure Omissions’ Not Actionable Under 10(b) of Securities Exchange Act, Resolving Circuit Split

Morgan Lewis on

In a blow to the plaintiffs’ securities bar, the US Supreme Court in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners unanimously held that a “pure omission”—the failure to disclose information in the absence of an inaccurate,...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - April 12, 2024

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions today: Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, No. 22-1074: This case involves the “unconstitutional conditions doctrine,” set forth in Nollan v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P.

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court decided Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., No. 22-1165, holding that an omission violates Rule 10b-5(b) only if the omission renders other affirmative...more

Stinson LLP

SCOTUS: Pure Omissions Do Not Support Securities Fraud Claims Even If the Omissions Violate SEC Disclosure Requirements

Stinson LLP on

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. et al. v. Moab Partners L.P. et al., holding that an omission to make disclosures required by U.S. Securities and Exchange...more

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti,...

What Constitutes a Misleading Statement in a Company’s Response to a Data Breach?

Takeaway: To ensure investor safety and emphasize a commitment to user privacy, corporate executives and similarly-situated high ranking officers must not provide any statements or omissions that affirmatively create a...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Securities Class Action Filings Continue Record Pace

Several securities litigation trends over recent years show no signs of abating in 2020. Federal securities class action filings seem likely to remain at elevated levels. Last year, for the third consecutive year, more than...more

Mintz - Securities Litigation Viewpoints

Tenth Circuit Affirms Extraterritorial Reach of SEC Enforcement of the Federal Securities Laws

In the Traffic Monsoon litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that the enforcement provisions of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act reach Traffic Monsoon’s sales to customers outside of the...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Key Enforcement Highlights from SEC Speaks 2019

On April 5-6, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) held its annual SEC Speaks Conference in Washington, D.C. Summarized below are several significant insights conveyed by SEC Staff that are instructive for...more

A&O Shearman

After Oral Argument, Supreme Court Dismisses Emulex Appeal, Prompting Speculation As To Court’s View Regarding Existence Of...

A&O Shearman on

On April 23, 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed the writ of certiorari as “improvidently granted” in a closely-watched appeal raising the question whether an assertion of mere negligence is sufficient to plead and prove a...more

Proskauer - Corporate Defense and Disputes

Supreme Court Hearing Raises Questions About Private Rights of Action Under § 14 of Securities Exchange

One of the more intriguing rulings of this Supreme Court Term is the Court’s one-sentence order yesterday dismissing as improvidently granted the writ of certiorari issued in Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian (No. 18-459). The...more

A&O Shearman

Supreme Court Hears Argument On Whether Mere Negligence Is Sufficient To Sustain Investor Claims Under Section 14(e) Of The...

A&O Shearman on

On April 15, 2019, the Supreme Court heard argument in a closely-watched case asking whether mere negligence is sufficient to plead and prove a claim under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange...more

Mintz - Securities Litigation Viewpoints

Upcoming Supreme Court Cases Worth Noting by Institutional Investors

The U.S. Supreme Court‘s 2017 term begins October 2nd and we will be tracking at least three cases relevant to institutional investors: •Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund •Digital Realty Trust v....more

Dechert LLP

Supreme Court to Consider Whether Non-Compliance with SEC Regulation Can Give Rise to Securities Fraud Liability

Dechert LLP on

In Leidos, Inc. v. Indiana Public Retirement System, No. 16-581, the U.S. Supreme Court will resolve an important circuit split regarding securities fraud liability. Specifically, the Court will determine whether Item 303 of...more

27 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide