Roth

Roth v. Reyes

Good Law
567 F.3d 1077·2009 WL 1564228·2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 12509
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 5, 200907-16805California3,160 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikuta, J.

Andrew Roth brought this action on behalf of Brocade Communications Systems under § 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78p(b). He seeks to recover “short swing” profits, defined as “profits earned within a six months’ period by the purchase and sale of securities,” Blau v. Lehman, 368 U.S. 403, 405 , 82 S.Ct. 451 , 7 L.Ed.2d 403 (1962), from four of Brocade’s top officers: Gregory Reyes, Michael Byrd, Antonio Canova, and Jack Cuthbert. Because Roth’s action is barred by § 16(b)’s two-year limitations period, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of his complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

I

Section 16(b) was designed to prevent corporate insiders “from profiteering through short-swing securities transactions on the basis of inside information.” Foremost-McKesson, Inc. v. Provident Securities Co., 423 U.S. 232, 234 , 96 S.Ct. 508 , 46 L.Ed.2d 464 (1976). It is a strict liability rule that “requires the statutorily defined inside, short-swing trader to disgorge all profits realized on all ‘purchases’ and ‘sales’ within the specified time period, without proof of actual abuse of insider information, and without…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.