Shearman And Sterling

balance scale

Mar 01, 2013

Supreme Court Decides AMGEN – Allows Plaintiff Class to be Certified Without Separate Materiality Inquiry

Subscribe

Jump to...

 
On February 27, 2013, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, No. 11-1085 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2013). In a six to three decision, the Court held that plaintiffs asserting claims for violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 need not, at the class certification stage of a proceeding, prove that alleged misrepresentations were material in order to avail themselves of the fraud on the market presumption in establishing predominance under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). The Court further held that defendants could not rebut the fraud on the market presumption at the class certification stage solely by establishing that such misrepresentations were immaterial (e.g., through the “truth-on-the-market” defense).

View full memo, "Supreme Court Decides AMGEN – Allows Plaintiff Class to be Certified Without Separate Materiality Inquiry"

Authors and Contributors

Stuart J. Baskin

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 4974

+1 212 848 4974

New York

Kirsten Nelson Cunha

Of Counsel

Litigation

+1 212 848 4320

+1 212 848 4320

New York

Jerome S. Fortinsky

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 4900

+1 212 848 4900

New York

Alan S. Goudiss

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 4906

+1 212 848 4906

New York

Adam Hakki

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 4924

+1 212 848 4924

New York

Daniel H.R. Laguardia

Partner

Litigation

+1 415 616 1114

+1 415 616 1114

+1 212 848 4731

+1 212 848 4731

San Francisco

Daniel Lewis

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 8691

+1 212 848 8691

New York

John A. Nathanson

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 8611

+1 212 848 8611

New York

Brian H. Polovoy

Partner

Litigation

+1 212 848 4703

+1 212 848 4703

New York