One trend I have noted on this site in recent years is the proclivity of plaintiffs’ lawyers to file securities class action lawsuits or shareholder derivative lawsuits in the wake of antitrust regulatory or enforcement actions. These kinds of lawsuits tend to cluster in specific industries as antitrust enforcement authorities concentrate on alleged anticompetitive behavior in those sectors. One industry that recently was the focus of both regulatory action and securities litigation is the poultry production industry.
As discussed here, beginning in 2016 companies in this industry that found themselves the subject of antitrust enforcement actions were hit with follow on securities litigation. In connection with one of those suits involving poultry producer Pilgrim’s Pride the court recently granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Both the lawsuit and the court’s ruling are significant given the current Presidential administration’s ramped-up antitrust enforcement approach and the possibility for resulting follow-on D&O claims. The Court’s March 8, 2022 order in the Pilgrim’s Pride case can be found here.
Continue Reading Antitrust Enforcement Follow-On Securities Suit Against Pilgrim’s Pride Dismissed
As readers of this blog know, the various board diversity lawsuits that the plaintiffs’ lawyers filed in late 2020 and early 2021 have uniformly fared poorly in the courts. In the latest dismissal motion ruling in one of these suits, the court in the board diversity suit filed against the directors of Cisco Systems has granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, albeit without prejudice. The court’s ruling in the Cisco Systems board diversity suit is noteworthy because the court addressed the merits of the plaintiff’s Section 14(a) claims. A copy of the court’s March 1, 2022 dismissal order can be found 
As I have noted in numerous posts on this site (most recently 
At least since Elon Musk’s 
As I have noted in numerous prior posts on this site, over the course of the last two years plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed a host of COVID-19-related securities claims. With the passage of time, many of these cases have now worked their way to the motion to dismiss stage. Although the results have been mixed, the dismissal motions have been granted in several cases. In the latest example of favorable outcome for a COVID-19-related lawsuit defendant, the court in the COVID-19-related securities suit pending against Chembio Diagnostics and its executives recently granted the corporate defendants’ dismissal motion. However, in an odd twist, the court denied the dismissal motion of the company’s offering underwriters. A copy of the court’s February 23, 2022 order in the case can be found 
In my recent 
ust as the overall number of securities class action lawsuit filings declined in 2021 relative to the year prior (as discussed in detail 
In the latest post-SPAC-merger securities class action lawsuit, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a securities suit against a rare earth mining and processing company that completed a SPAC merger in November 2020. Like many SPAC-related securities suits that have been filed in recent months, the lawsuit follows a drop in the company’s share prices following a negative short-seller report. A copy of the February 22, 2022 lawsuit against MP Materials Corp. can be found 
readers of this blog well know, since the initial U.S. coronavirus outbreak in March 2020, plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed dozens of COVID-19-related securities class action lawsuits. Even though the coronavirus-related litigation phenomenon, like the coronavirus outbreak itself, is about to enter its third year, relatively few of the coronavirus-related securities suits have yet reached the motion to dismiss stage. However, last week the federal judge presiding over the coronavirus-related lawsuit filed against Zoom Video Telecommunications entered an order granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The Court’s February 16, 2022 order, a copy of which can be found