Procedural History

Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds

568 U.S. 455 (2013)

Quick Answer

What is the procedural history of Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the requirements for class certification under the Securities Exchange Act, clarifying the standard for establishing the reliability of market efficiency.

Source: 568 U.S. 455 (2013)

Timeline
1

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

2007

Action: Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds filed a class action lawsuit against Amgen, alleging securities fraud.

Outcome: The District Court granted Amgen's motion to dismiss, which was later appealed.

Significance: This initial ruling focused on whether the plaintiffs met the requirements for class certification.

2

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

March 2010

Action: The Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court's decision, allowing the case to proceed as a class action.

Outcome: The appellate court determined that plaintiffs could establish reliance on the market for class certification without a need for individualized proof.

Significance: This ruling emphasized the presumption of reliance on the integrity of the market under the fraud-on-the-market theory.

3

U.S. Supreme Court

April 2013

Action: The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision.

Outcome: The Supreme Court upheld the Ninth Circuit's ruling regarding class certification.

Significance: The Supreme Court provided clarity on the requirements for establishing market efficiency and presumption of reliance.

4

U.S. Supreme Court

May 2013

Action: The Supreme Court issued its opinion in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds.

Outcome: The Court confirmed that plaintiffs are not required to prove materiality at the class certification stage.

Significance: This landmark decision reinforced the principles of class action litigation in securities fraud cases.

Procedural Posture

When the Supreme Court heard the case, it involved an appeal from the Ninth Circuit, which had allowed a class action lawsuit to proceed based on a presumption of reliance due to market efficiency, a key point contested by Amgen.

Standard of Review

The Supreme Court applied a de novo standard of review concerning the interpretation of class certification requirements.

Disposition

The Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit's decision, allowing the class action to proceed.

Key Procedural Lessons
  • Class certification under Rule 23 does not require proof of materiality at the initial stage.
  • The presumption of reliance can significantly influence the determination of class certification in securities cases.
  • Understanding market efficiency is crucial for establishing the framework for fraud-on-the-market claims.

Master Procedural History with Briefly

Get AI-powered study tools, practice questions, and comprehensive legal resources.