Coles v. Nyko Technologies, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that publication of the required notice in Business Wire served as sufficient notice for the purposes of the PSLRA
• “[C]ourts have consistently rejected the argument that post-disclosure purchases preclude a proposed class representative from meeting Rule 23(a) requirements.”
• rebutting the § 78u-4(a)(3)(B) presumption requires “exacting proof”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).