In Max Royal LLC v. Atieva, Inc., No. 23-16049, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 19910 (9th Cir. Aug. 8, 2024), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a securities class action brought by investors who purchased shares of the special purpose acquisition company Churchill Capital Corporation IV (“CCIV”) in early 2021 before it merged with Atieva, Inc. d/b/a Lucid Motors (“Lucid”) in July 2021. The three-judge panel held that purchasers of a security of an acquiring company do not have standing under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), to sue the target company for alleged misstatements by the target company made prior to the merger between the two companies. The Court’s decision provides protection to target company executives speaking to the press about their company’s forecasts and capabilities prior to acquisition by tightening the standing requirements for pre-acquisition SPAC investor plaintiffs.
About
John Stigi is a partner in the Business Trial Practice Group and Co-Leader of the firm's Securities Enforcement and Litigation Team.
Latest Post
More Posts
Supreme Court Limits SEC’s Enforcement Power to Penalize Fraud
Supreme Court Limits SEC’s Enforcement Power to Penalize Fraud
Supreme Court Holds “Pure Omissions” Are Not Actionable Under Rule 10b-5(b)
Delaware Court of Chancery Puts Practitioners on Notice Regarding Voting Formalities Around Merger Agreements
Delaware Corporations Must Employ Procedural Safeguards When Approving a Reincorporation that Could Benefit a Controlling Stockholder to Avoid Entire Fairness Standard of Review
The Delaware Court of Chancery Confirms that Duty of Oversight Claims Against Corporate Officers Are Subject to the Same High Pleading Standards Applicable to Duty of Oversight Claims Against Corporate Directors
In a Case of First Impression, Ninth Circuit Addresses Personal Jurisdiction Issues Involving Non-Resident Corporation Providing a Web-Based Payment Processing Platform
Ninth Circuit Provides Guidance on SEC Rule 16b-3 Short-Swing Profit Liability Exemption
Delaware Court of Chancery Clarifies Heightened Standard for Recovery of Attorneys’ Fees in Disclosure-Based Deal Litigation
Ninth Circuit Enforces Delaware Forum Selection Clause to Affirm Dismissal of Derivative Claim for Alleged Violation of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
United States Supreme Court Holds That Section 11 Plaintiffs Must Purchase Securities Issued Under the Registration Statement They Seek to Challenge
Protecting Privilege in Case of a Dispute with Former Director
Second Circuit Declines to Allow SEC Rule 10b-5 Claim for “Scheme Liability” to Proceed Where the Alleged Misconduct Amounted Only to the Making of Material Misstatements or Omissions
California Court of Appeal Reaffirms Broad Inspection Rights Accorded to Directors Under Section 1602 of the California Corporations Code
About
John Stigi is a partner in the Business Trial Practice Group and Co-Leader of the firm's Securities Enforcement and Litigation Team.
Connect: http://www.sheppardmullin.com/jstigi
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS