Search for: "SCIENTIFIC ATLANTA INC."
Results 81 - 100
of 177
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Sep 2007, 9:44 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., No. 06-43: Does engaging in transactions that have "no legitimate business or economic purpose exception to inflate artificially [a] public corporation's financial statements" subject the sham transactor to liability for securities fraud even if they "themselves made no public statements concerning those transactions"? [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 9:06 am
According to Order No. 22, Respondents Cisco Systems, Inc., Cisco Consumer Products LLC, Scientific-Atlanta LLC, and Cisco Systems International B.V. [read post]
16 Jan 2008, 3:21 pm
Scientific-Atlanta Inc. and Motorola Inc.) [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 9:58 am
Scientific Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008), or decisions governing class action certification, including Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jul 2012, 9:35 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008) (post), held that aiding and abetting securities fraud doesn't run afoul of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, at least in private litigation. [read post]
21 Jul 2012, 9:35 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008) (post), held that aiding and abetting securities fraud doesn't run afoul of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, at least not in private litigation. [read post]
24 May 2013, 10:09 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008) (see blog article here), that plaintiffs allege a false material misrepresentation or omission, and reliance thereupon. [read post]
17 Sep 2021, 5:46 am
For example, Scientific Atlanta Inc., a cable and telecommunications equipment manufacturer, states in its 2005 Form 10-K filing: “A failure to maintain our relationships with customers that make significant purchases of our products and services could harm our business and results of operations. [read post]
31 Jul 2007, 6:05 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 10:55 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008) [see Blog article here]. [read post]
1 Apr 2019, 10:29 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008) (blog article here), that investors plead and prove they (or the market generally) were aware of the deceptive conduct at issue, i.e., they knew of and relied upon the fraudulent acts of the “mailroom clerk” or other “tangential” participants. [read post]
25 Jul 2007, 5:15 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., et al., respondents, defendants below, Scientific-Atlanta and Motorola, were equipment vendors of Charter Communications. [read post]
27 Feb 2008, 10:00 am
The Facts and the Theory In the suit, Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC ("petitioners"), alleged that Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., and Motorola, Inc. [read post]
17 Aug 2007, 1:03 pm
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., No. 06-43 (U.S.). [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 4:57 pm
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. [read post]
7 May 2010, 12:29 pm
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008), to limit securities fraud claims against secondary actors. [read post]
23 Oct 2010, 12:39 pm
Gray Dog Partners, Inc., (Del Mar, CA)? [read post]
20 Sep 2010, 6:00 am
Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008). [read post]
23 Oct 2010, 1:11 pm
Gray Dog Partners, Inc., (Del Mar, CA)? [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 5:15 am
The Commission can charge vendors like Motorola and Scientific Atlanta as primary violators. [read post]
