VIEW TREE
ICON KEY
795:false:false:false:false:false:false:true:false:false:!:false:-1:-1
Scope of conduct prohibited under Rule 10b-5.
Add Comment
Contributed in 2008 & last edited in 2009 by David Gold
Browse from Government enforcement
Law
»
Commerce, labor, particular activities & industries
»
Securities
»
Liability & enforcement
»
Fraud claims
»
SEC Rule 10b-5
»
Substance
»
Liability
»
Scope of prohibited conduct: Scope of conduct prohibited...
Narrow Down
Contribution Suggestions
vouch for authority for rule...
An average daily trading volume in a security of one to two percent of the total outstanding is generally enough to support a presumption of...In re Xcelera.com Securities Litigation, 430 F.3d 503, 514 (1st Cir. 2005) (affirming class certification order where average daily trading volume exceeded four percent of outstanding shares of company's stock).
in support of
An average daily trading volume in a security of one to two percent of the total outstanding is generally enough to support a presumption of efficiency.complete authority for rule...
Pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, a plaintiff in a private civil action claiming a Rule 10b-5 violation can withstand a...Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308, pin?, 127 S. Ct. 2499, 2504 (2007) (construing "strong inference" and vacating and remanding for application to complaint).
in support of
Pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, a plaintiff in a private civil action claiming a Rule 10b-5 violation can withstand a motion to dismiss only by pleading with particularity facts supporting a strong inference of scienter.vouch for authority for rule...
In a 10b-5 action, in order to establish a rebuttable presumption of reliance using a fraud on the market theory, plaintiff must prove (1)...In re Convergent Technology Securities Litigation, 948 F.2d 507, 512 n.2 (9th Cir. 1991).
in support of
In a 10b-5 action, in order to establish a rebuttable presumption of reliance using a fraud on the market theory, plaintiff must prove (1) defendant made a public material missrepresentation and the shares were (2) traded in an efficient market (3) between the time of the missrepresentations and the revelation of truth.