Are Item 303 Omissions Actionable Under Rule 10b-5?
During its October term this year, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument in Leidos v. Indiana Public Retirement System, No. 16-581, on an important federal securities fraud issue: Whether a publicly held company's omission of "known trends and uncertainties" in its annual or interim reports, as required by Item 303 of Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation S-K, can give rise to a private securities fraud claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 (Rule 10-5).
June 05, 2017 at 05:07 PM
7 minute read
During its October term this year, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument in Leidos v. Indiana Public Retirement System, No. 16-581, on an important federal securities fraud issue: Whether a publicly held company's omission of “known trends and uncertainties” in its annual or interim reports, as required by Item 303 of Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation S-K, can give rise to a private securities fraud claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 (Rule 10-5). The court granted Leidos Inc.'s writ of certiorari to resolve a conflict between the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit—which held in the securities class action against Leidos that a violation of Item 303 can give rise to Rule 10b-5 liability—and the Ninth and Third circuits—which, in earlier decisions, had held to the contrary.
Applying the holding and reasoning of its 2015 opinion, Stratte-McClure v. Morgan Stanley, 776 F.3d 94, 101 (2d Cir. 2015), the Second Circuit held in Indiana Public Retirement System v. SAIC, 818 F.3d 85, 94 & n.7 (2d Cir. 2016), that the failure of Leidos (formerly known as SAIC Inc.) to disclose under Item 303 its exposure for alleged employee fraud and overbilling in connection with certain government contract work stated a cause of action under Rule 10b-5. The Second Circuit's decisions in Stratte-McClure and SAIC conflict with the Ninth Circuit's opinion, In re NVIDIA Securities Litigation, 768 F.3d 1046, 1054-56 (9th Cir. 2014), and the Third Circuit's opinion, Oran v. Stafford, 226 F.3d 275, 287-88 (3d Cir. 2000), in which the courts held that an Item 303 omission is not actionable under Rule 10b-5.
In granting certiorari, the court may have found this circuit split particularly compelling since, as Leidos pointed out in its cert petition, most securities class actions are filed in the Second and Ninth circuits. The Third Circuit is the third most popular circuit for filing securities class actions. In addition, Justice Samuel Alito authored the opinion in Oran when he served on the Third Circuit.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Crypto Guys Seem to Like Paul Atkins as a New SEC Commissioner, but Will He Be Good for the Securities Industry?
6 minute readThe Increase in Artificial Intelligence-Related Securities Class Actions
10 minute read'Training to Replace Yourself': Kessler Topaz Co-Founder Set to Retire
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Goodwin Procter Relocates to Renewable-Powered Office in San Francisco’s Financial District
- 2'Didn't Notice Patient Wasn't Breathing': $13.7M Verdict Against Anesthesiologists
- 3'Astronomical' Interest Rates: $1B Settlement to Resolve Allegations of 'Predatory' Lending Cancels $534M in Small-Business Debts
- 4Senator Plans to Reintroduce Bill to Split 9th Circuit
- 5Law Firms Converge to Defend HIPAA Regulation
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250