Menora Mivtachim Insurance Ltd., Menora Mivtachim and the Federation of Engineers Provident fund Management Ltd., Clal Insurance Company Ltd., Menora Mivtachim Pensions and Gemel Ltd., Clal Pension and Provident Ltd., Atudot Pension fund for Employees and Independent Workers, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. Frutarom Industries Ltd., Ori Yehudai, Ari Rosenthal, Alon Granot, Guy Gill, Defendants-Appellees* On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York International Flavors & Fragrances Inc. (“IFF”), a U.S.-based seller of flavoring and fragrance products, acquired Frutarom Industries Ltd. (“Frutarom”), an Israeli firm in the same industry. Leading up to the merger, Frutarom allegedly made material misstatements about its compliance with anti-bribery laws and the source of its business growth. Plaintiffs, who bought stock in IFF, sued Frutarom, alleging that those misstatements violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. We conclude that Plaintiffs lack statutory standing to sue. Under the purchaser-seller rule, standing to bring a claim under Section 10(b) is limited to purchasers or sellers of securities issued by the company about which a misstatement was made. See Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723 (1975). Plaintiffs here lack standing to sue based on alleged misstatements that Frutarom made about itself because they never bought or sold shares of Frutarom. AFFIRMED. Judge Pérez concurs in a separate opinion. MICHAEL PARK, C.J. International Flavors & Fragrances Inc. (“IFF”), a U.S.-based seller of flavoring and fragrance products, acquired Frutarom Industries Ltd. (“Frutarom”), an Israeli firm in the same industry. Leading up to the merger, Frutarom allegedly made material misstatements about its compliance with anti-bribery laws and the source of its business growth. Plaintiffs, who bought stock in IFF, sued Frutarom, alleging that those misstatements violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. We conclude that Plaintiffs lack statutory standing to sue. Under the purchaser-seller rule, standing to bring a claim under Section 10(b) is limited to purchasers or sellers of securities issued by the company about which a misstatement was made. See Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723 (1975). Plaintiffs here lack standing to sue based on alleged misstatements that Frutarom made about itself because they never bought or sold shares of Frutarom. We thus affirm the district court’s dismissal of the complaint. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual Background1 Plaintiffs are a putative class of investors who acquired IFF securities between May 7, 2018 and August 12, 2019. They allege that from 2002 to 2018, Frutarom’s executives engaged in a “long-running bribery scheme” by which they bribed key employees of important clients in order to “generate continued and increased business with the customer[s].” Compl.
