Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano | |
---|---|
Argued January 10, 2011 Decided March 22, 2011 | |
Full case name | Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., et al. v. Siracusano, et al. |
Docket no. | 09-1156 |
Citations | 563 U.S. 27 (more) 131 S. Ct. 1309; 179 L. Ed. 2d 398 |
Case history | |
Prior | Motion to dismiss granted, No. 2:04-cv-00886, 2005 WL 3970117 (D. Ariz. Dec. 15, 2005); reversed, 585 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir. 2009); cert. granted, 560 U.S. 964 (2010). |
Holding | |
9th Circuit Affirmed | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Sotomayor, joined by unanimous |
Laws applied | |
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano, 563 U.S. 27 (2011), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding whether a plaintiff can state a claim for securities fraud under §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 15 U.S.C. §78j(b), and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, 17 CFR §240.10b-5 (2010), based on a pharmaceutical company's failure to disclose reports of adverse events associated with a product if the reports do not find statistically significant evidence that the adverse effects may be caused by the use of the product. In a 9–0 opinion delivered by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court affirmed the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's ruling that the respondents, plaintiffs in a securities fraud class action against Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., and three Matrixx executives, had stated a claim under §10(b) and Rule 10b-5.[1]