Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Navellier & Associates, Inc., et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, No. 20-1581, 21-1857, 22-1733, 23-1509 · judgment July 16, 2024


Certiorari denied · June 6, 2025
Pre-decision estimate: 3% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Questions presented

The questions presented in this case are:

  1. Whether the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) can seek, and the courts are authorized, under 15 U.S.C. §78u(d)(5) or §78u(d)(7) or Liu v. SEC 591 U.S. 71 (2020), to award disgorgement for investor “ victim” clients who suffered no pecuniary harm as a result of their investment adviser’s violation of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal security statutes, including 15 U.S.C. §80b6(1), (2)?

  2. Whether this Court’s holdings in SEC v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc. 375 U.S. 180, 193, n. 39 (1963) and its progeny TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc. 426 U.S. 438 (1976) and Basic Inc. v. Levinson 485 U.S. 224  VKRXOGEHDEURJDWHGRUFODULÀHGWRHVWDEOLVKWKDW³ in determining whether an alleged misrepresentation or omission is “material” in “face-to-face” (as opposed to class action “fraud on the market”) securities law anti-fraud violation civil enforcement cases, including §206(1), (2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 [15 U.S.C. §80b-6(1), (2)] violation cases, the SEC must prove that the investor(s) actually relied on the misrepresentation or omission and LI WKH LQYHVWPHQW DGYLVRU SURGXFHV DIÀUPDWLYH LQYHVWRU evidence of non-reliance, the materiality issue must be determined by a jury, not by a judge by summary judgment?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Samuel Kornhauser

For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Linked docket
24A622

Proceedings

  1. Aug 18 2025
    Rehearing DENIED.
  2. Jul 24 2025
    DISTRIBUTED.
  3. Jul 01 2025
  4. Jun 06 2025
    Petition DENIED.
  5. Jun 04 2025
    Supplemental brief of petitioners Navellier & Associates, Inc., et al. filed.
  6. May 20 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/5/2025.
  7. May 19 2025
    Reply of petitioners Navellier & Associates, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
  8. May 12 2025
    Letter of Navellier & Associates, Inc., et al. not accepted for filing. (May 13, 2025)
  9. May 05 2025
    Brief of respondent Securities and Exchange Commission in opposition filed.
  10. Mar 27 2025
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 5, 2025.
  11. Mar 26 2025
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 4, 2025 to May 5, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
  12. Mar 03 2025
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 4, 2025)
  13. Jan 23 2025
    Application (24A622) granted by Justice Jackson extending the time to file until March 1, 2025.
  14. Jan 20 2025
    Application (24A622) to extend further the time from January 30, 2025 to March 1, 2025, submitted to Justice Jackson.
  15. Dec 27 2024
    Application (24A622) granted by Justice Jackson extending the time to file until January 30, 2025.
  16. Dec 24 2024
    Renewed application of Navellier & Associates, Inc. not accepted for filing. (December 26, 2024)
  17. Dec 19 2024
    Application (24A622) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 31, 2024 to January 30, 2025, submitted to Justice Jackson.