Whether SLUSA bars a state-law class action 'alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact' when the complaint contains no such allegations

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (“SLUSA”) precludes most state-law class actions “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact.” 15 U.S.C. § 78bb(f)(1)(A). The circuits, however, are split over how to determine whether a complaint is “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact.” The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion has deepened that rift by entering new territory, holding that SLUSA bars this state law class action as one “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact” even though all parties have agreed that all material facts were disclosed. The questions presented are: 1. Whether SLUSA bars a state-law class action “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact” when the complaint contains no such allegations. 2. Whether SLUSA bars a state-law class action “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact” when it is unlikely that an issue of fraud will arise in the course of the litigation. 3. Whether SLUSA bars a state-law class action “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact” when the claim requires no such proof. 4. Whether SLUSA bars a state-law class action “alleging a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact” when all parties have agreed that all material facts were disclosed.