Friedberg v. Discreet Logic Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the PSLRA pleading standard was intended to be stronger than the existing Second Circuit standard
• refusing to dismiss complaint brought under the Reform Act where two officers sold 33% and 50% of their respective stock holdings, and each of the named defendants sold some stock
• emphasizing the temporal proximity — as large as two-and-a-half months — of the stock sales and the announcement of the negative news as circumstantial evidence of conscious misbehavior
• introduction of new products that would affect sales about two months after secondary public offering supports inference of prior knowledge
• “Where motive is not apparent, it is still possible to plead scienter by identifying circumstances indicating conscious behavior by the defendant, though the strength of the circumstantial allegations must be correspondingly greater.”
• defendants’ representation that “others could introduce new products that would render Discreet’s existing products obsolete” was materially misleading because the defendants “failed to disclose that such a product ... had already been created by [a competitor]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).