No. 20-1364

BofI Holding, Inc., et al. v. Houston Municipal Employees Pension System

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-03-30
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (1)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: basic-inc-v-levinson disclosure-standards dura-pharmaceuticals efficient-capital-markets-hypothesis efficient-market-hypothesis fraud-on-the-market investor-protection loss-causation market-price securities-exchange-act securities-fraud
Key Terms:
ERISA Securities ClassAction JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether disputed public allegations about an issuer or its business, without any additional corroborating disclosure or event, reveal to an efficient market the 'truth' for purposes of establishing loss causation under Dura

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In Basic Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988), this Court recognized the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance for private rights of action brought by investors under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5. The fraud-on-the-market presumption is predicated upon the “efficient capital markets hypothesis” (ECMH). The ECMH posits that the market price of a security trading in an efficient stock market reflects all publicly available information, including any misrepresentation, about the issuer of the securities and its business. In Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336 (2005), this Court held that in such fraud-on-the-market cases the element of loss causation requires more than a showing that the alleged misrepresentation inflated a security’s market price at the time of the investor’s purchase. An investor-plaintiff also must show that the misrepresentation caused the investor’s economic loss when the “truth beg[an] to leak out” publicly into the efficient market. The questions presented here are: 1. Whether disputed public allegations about an issuer or its business, without any additional corroborating disclosure or event, reveal to an efficient market the “truth” for purposes of establishing loss causation under Dura (as held by the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, in direct conflict with the Eleventh Circuit). 2. Whether allowing a plaintiff to show that a disclosure or event revealed the “truth” about the issuer or its business by pointing to the magnitude of the decline in the price of the issuer’s stock conflicts with Dura and misapplies Basic. (i) ll 3. Whether the Court should overrule Basic to the extent it recognizes the ECMH, as that economic theory sows confusion in the lower courts with respect to the proper analysis of loss causation.

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-11
Reply of petitioners BofI Holding, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2021-07-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-25
Brief of respondent Houston Municipal Employees Pension System in opposition filed.
2021-05-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 25, 2021.
2021-05-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 28, 2021 to June 25, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-05-14
Response in opposition to motion for an extension of time from petitioner BofI Holding, Inc., et al. filed.
2021-04-29
Brief amici curiae of Securities and Financial Markets Association, et al. filed.
2021-04-28
Response Requested. (Due May 28, 2021)
2021-04-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.
2021-04-13
Waiver of right of respondent Houston Municipal Employees Pension System to respond filed.
2021-03-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 29, 2021)

Attorneys

BofI Holding, Inc., et al.
John P. Stigi IIISheppard, Mullin, Richter and Hampton LLP, Petitioner
John P. Stigi IIISheppard, Mullin, Richter and Hampton LLP, Petitioner
Financial Markets Association and Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America
Jonathan K. YoungwoodSimpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP, Amicus
Jonathan K. YoungwoodSimpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP, Amicus
Houston Municipal Employees Pension System
Eric F. CitronGoldstein & Russell, P.C., Respondent
Eric F. CitronGoldstein & Russell, P.C., Respondent
Richard Martin HeimannLieff Cabraser Heimann and Bernstein, LLP, Respondent
Richard Martin HeimannLieff Cabraser Heimann and Bernstein, LLP, Respondent