In Re Arthrocare Corporation Securities Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that to state a Section 20(a) control-person claim, the plaintiff must allege (1) a primary violation by a controlled person; and (2) direct or indirect control of the primary violator by the defendant
• SOX certifications supported scienter when accompanied by media reports of the- fraud at issue and the defendants’ denial of those reports
• “Multiple Fifth Circuit decisions suggest resignations have little implication on the scienter analysis.”
• “[W]hether or not the stocks in this case were sold pursuant to a 10b5–1 trading plan is irrelevant at this stage in the proceedings, as the existence of such a plan is an affirmative defense[.]”
• “[W]hether or not the stocks in this case were sold pursuant to a 10b5–1 trading plan is irrelevant at this stage in the proceedings, as the existence of such a plan is an affirmative defense[.]”
• “[W]hen the number, size, timing, nature, frequency, and context of the misapplication of accounting principles or restatement are taken into account, the balance of the inferences to be drawn from such allegations may shift significantly in favor of scienter.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).