Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment
City of Dearborn Heights Act 345 Police & Fire Retirement System v. Align Technology, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 5, 2017No. 14-16814Published
1Concurring in the judgmentKleinfeld, Senior Circuit Judge
I concur. The majority opinion is compelling on the record before us, with respect to Jack of scienter. Because scienter is an element of section 10(b) liability, the reasoning in Part I.B., with which I fully agree, compels the result we reach.
The majority provides an alternative ground for reaching the same result, under the Supreme Court decision in Omnicare Inc., v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund.1 That was a section 11 case. This js a section 10(b) case. As the Supreme Court explained in Herman & MacLean v. Huddleston, section 10(b) and section 11 are…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Herman & MacLean v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Industry Pension FundSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
- Inter-Local Pension Fund Gcc/i v. Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Claude Reese v. Robert MaloneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- National Federation of the Blind v. United Airlines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016