Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that if “the information that defendants are alleged to have withheld from or misrepresented to the market has entered the market through other channels, the market will not have been misled, and ... plaintiffs’ claims ... will fail”
• providing that 10 “conclusory allegations of law and unwarranted inferences are insufficient to 11 defeat a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim”
• holding securities sec- tion 11 claims sounding in fraud are subject to Rule 9(b) par- ticularity requirements
• commenting that “[cjonclusory allegations and unwarranted inferences” will not defeat a motion to dismiss
• noting that consideration of “the full text of the 4 Prospectus, including portions which were not mentioned in the complaint[],” is 5 appropriate in the context of a motion to dismiss
• noting that plaintiff had alleged “both material omissions and misstatements” by alleging that defendant “failed to disclose its inadequate reserves for returns” and affirmatively misstated in its Prospectus that “it provides adequate allowances for returns”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).