Did the Second Circuit correctly apply standing requirements under Article III and recent Supreme Court precedents for a Section 16(b) Securities Exchange Act claim where no concrete injury was alleged?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit apply the correct standard of law, under Article III of the United States Constitution and TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), to hold that Respondent Packer has standing to sue under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for a statutory violation alone, where the Second Circuit found an analogy between Section 16(b) and a commonlaw violation of fiduciary duty, but Respondent alleged no further injury? 2. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit err in finding that Respondent Packer has standing, under Article III and Thole v. U.S. Bank N.A., 590 U.S. 538 (2020), based on an alleged breach of Section 16(b) and/or breach of common-law fiduciary duty where Respondent alleged no further injury?