The anti-retaliation provision of the Sarb­anes-Oxley Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1514A(a), forbids retaliation against an employee because he or she disclosed to certain federal or company officials information about conduct which the employee "reasonably believe[d]" violated certain federal prohibitions. The employee's belief must have been objectively reasonable.

The question presented is:

Should the determination under § 1514A(a) as to whether an employee's belief was objectively reasonable be made by the trier of fact, so long as reasonable minds could disagree, or by the court as a matter of law?

Should the determination under § 1514A(a) as to whether an employee's belief was objectively reasonable be made by the trier of fact, so long as reasonable minds could disagree, or by the court as a matter of law?