Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Slack Technologies, LLC, fka Slack Technologies, Inc., et al. v. Fiyyaz Pirani
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 20-16419 · judgment September 20, 2021
Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Ninth Circuit decision below, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and a business petitioner.
Question presented
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 permits suits alleging misrepresentations in a registration statement only if the plaintiffs "acquir[ed] such security." 15 U.S.C. § 77k(a). Section 12(a)(2) of the Act provides that someone who "offers or sells a security ... by means of a prospectus" may be liable for misstatements in that prospectus "to the person purchasing such security." 15 U.S.C. § 77l(a)(2). For more than 50 years, every court of appeals to consider the question has held that "such security" in Section 11 means a share registered under the registration statement the plaintiffs claim is misleading. And this Court has held that Section 12 (a)(2) applies only when there is an obligation to distribute a prospectus-an obligation that exists only for registered shares. Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., 513 U.S. 561, 584 (1995); 15 U.S.C. §§ 77d, 77e. Departing from that well-established law, a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit read "such security" to mean any share, registered or unregistered, and held that plaintiffs suing under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) need not prove that they bought registered shares. The question presented is: Whether Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 require plaintiffs to plead and prove that they bought shares registered under the registration statement they claim is misleading.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Thomas G. Hungar
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
For respondent
Kevin K. Russell
Goldstein and Russell, P.C.
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage · 9 merits
(4 supporting pet./neither, 5 respondent)
Argument & decision
Argued April 17, 2023 — Thomas G. Hungar · Kevin K. Russell. Audio and transcript
Decided June 1, 2023. Opinion by Gorsuch.
Proceedings
- Jul 03 2023Judgment issued.
- Jun 01 2023Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Gorsuch, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
- Apr 17 2023Argued. For petitioners: Thomas G. Hungar, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Kevin K. Russell, Washington, D. C.
- Mar 29 2023Reply of petitioners Slack Technologies, LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 24 2023CIRCULATED
- Mar 06 2023Brief amici curiae of Former SEC Officials filed.
- Mar 06 2023Brief amici curiae of Law and Business Professors filed.
- Mar 06 2023Brief amici curiae of Evidence and Civil Procedure Scholars filed.
- Mar 06 2023Brief amici curiae of Institutional Investors filed.
- Mar 06 2023Brief amicus curiae of Nokota Capital Management, LP filed.
- Feb 27 2023Brief of respondent Fiyyaz Pirani filed.
- Feb 14 2023Letter of petitioners provide enlarged copies of the charts other images included in joint appendix received..
- Feb 08 2023Record requested from the U.S.C.A.-9th Circuit
- Feb 08 2023All records from the USCA-9th Circuit are available on PACER. Sealed records from the USDC-Northern District of California were transmitted electronically.
- Feb 03 2023Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.
- Feb 03 2023Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.
- Feb 03 2023Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.
- Feb 03 2023Brief amici curiae of Hon. Jay Clayton and Hon. Joseph A. Grundfest filed.
- Jan 31 2023SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 17, 2023.
- Jan 27 2023Brief of petitioners Slack Technologies, LLC, et al. filed.
- Jan 27 2023Joint appendix filed (Feb.14, 2023 - pages of enlarged images insert). (Statement of costs filed)
- Dec 13 2022Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Cato Institute GRANTED.
- Dec 13 2022Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Joseph A. Grundfest GRANTED.
- Dec 13 2022Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Washington Legal Foundation GRANTED.
- Dec 13 2022Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. GRANTED.
- Dec 13 2022Petition GRANTED.
- Nov 22 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/9/2022.
- Nov 21 2022Reply of petitioners Slack Technologies, LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Nov 02 2022Brief of respondent Fiyyaz Pirani in opposition filed.
- Nov 02 2022Brief amici curiae of Investor filed. (11/14/2022) (Distributed)
- Oct 03 2022Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Washington Legal Foundation.
- Oct 03 2022Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Joseph A. Grundfest.
- Oct 03 2022Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al.
- Sep 30 2022Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Cato Institute.
- Sep 12 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 2, 2022.
- Sep 08 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 3, 2022 to November 2, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Sep 07 2022Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Slack Technologies, LLC, et al.
- Aug 31 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 3, 2022)
- Jul 18 2022Application (22A36) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until August 31, 2022.
- Jul 13 2022Application (22A36) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 31, 2022 to August 31, 2022, submitted to Justice Kagan.