In Re Boston Technology, Inc. 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, in 10b-5 cases, statements are read in their “immediate context,” i.e., “the balance of what was said on the particular occasion, and the immediate circumstances in which the particular statement was made”
• pleadings insufficient where “[n]ot a single report, memorandum, meeting minute, or like item is referred to or specified in the Complaint”
• “Applying the requirements of Rule 9[b] to the law [of “entanglement”], a plaintiff is required to allege with particularity the time, place, content and speaker of the issuer’s communications with the analysts, and explain why the communications were fraudulent.”
• allegation that defendants repeatedly assured analysts that the company was “on track to .achieve ... strong-earnings and earnings growth,” without more, insufficient under Rule 9(b)
• “As long as an issuer declines ... to supplement these kinds of remarks with specifics, they are mere puf-fery.”
• ‘TOb-5 allegations must be organized into discrete units that are, standing alone, each capable of evaluation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).