Calderon-Serra v. Banco Santander Puerto Rico

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant is entitled to summary judgment if the 5 undisputed evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, shows plaintiff failed 6 to exhaust available administrative remedies
• holding that defendant is entitled to 8 ||summary judgment if the undisputed evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to 9 || plaintiff, shows plaintiff failed to exhaust available administrative remedies
• holding Rule 10b-5’s “in connection with” requirement satisfied when there was “no dispute as to whether the plaintiffs actually bought securities covered by the Exchange Act”
• noting that the \in connection with\ element should not be read \so broadly as to convert every common-law fraud that happens to involve securities into a violation of § 10(b)\ (quoting SEC v. Zandford, 535 U.S. 813, 820 (2002))
• treating the question as whether the fraud was \in connection with\ inducing customers to take out loans or to purchase securities
• it is the rare case that a failure to exhaust can be decided on a motion 4 to dismiss rather than a summary judgment motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).