IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:1 5-C V-003 07-F
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this class action, Plaintiffs allege Defendants made false and misleading statements in violation of: (1) Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act (the "Act") and Rule 1 Ob-5 promulgated thereunder, and (2) Section 20(a) of the Act. Section 10(b) of the Act makes it unlawful "[t]o use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange or any security not so registered, or any securities-based swap agreement any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of such rules and regulations as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors." 15 U.S.C. § 78j (b). Rule lOb-5 prohibits any person from "mak[ing] any untrue statement of a material fact or [omitting] to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. . . in connection with the purchase or sale of any security." 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(b). Under Section 20(a) of the Act,
منابع مشابه
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Tyler Division Bartex
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION BARTEX RESEARCH, LLC § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:07-CV-385 § FEDEX CORP., § et al. § ORDER ADOPTING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION OPINION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE The above entitled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Memorandum Opinion and Order of the Magistrate Judge (the “Opin...
متن کاملIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Google and Overture Services, Inc. (“Overture”). A First Amended Complaint was filed on May 14, 2004, and on November 29, 2004, Overture was dismissed as a defendant. Therefore, all references to the Complaint in this Opinion are to the First Amended Complaint, and only Google remains as a defendant. In a previous Memorandum Opinion discussed more fully below, the Court dismissed Google’s Motio...
متن کاملIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Google and Overture Services, Inc. (“Overture”). A First Amended Complaint was filed on May 14, 2004, and on November 29, 2004, Overture was dismissed as a defendant. Therefore, all references to the Complaint in this Opinion are to the First Amended Complaint, and only Google remains as a defendant. In a previous Memorandum Opinion discussed more fully below, the Court dismissed Google’s Motio...
متن کاملIs tobacco a drug? Administrative agencies as common law courts.
Professor Cass Sunstein argues that the FDA has the authority to regulate tobacco products. He considers the text of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which supports the FDA assertion, and the context of its enactment, which argues against the FDA. He resolves the tension between text and context in favor of FDA jurisdiction by turning to the emerging role of administrative agencies. ...
متن کامل