Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Barrick Gold Securities Litigation

United States District Court, S.D. New York

June 2, 2015

IN RE BARRICK GOLD SECURITIES LITIGATION

Christopher F. Moriarty, Esq., David P. Abel, Esq., James M. Hughes, Esq., Motley Rice LLC, Mt. Pleasant, SC.

William H. Narwold, Esq., Motley Rice LLC, Hartford, CT.

Jonathan M. Plasse, Esq., Serena Pia Hallowell, Esq., Christopher J. Keller, Esq., Joel H. Bernstein, Esq., Jonathan Gardner, Esq., Labaton Sucharow, New York, NY.

Brian P. Murray, Esq., Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, New York, NY.

Gregory B. Linkh, Esq., Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, New York, NY.

Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq., Michael Goldber, Esq., Robert V. Prongay, Esq., Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, Los Angeles, CA.

Ira M. Press, Esq., Kirby McInerney LLP, New York, NY.

Jeffrey A. Barrack, Esq., Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, Philadelphia, PA, For Plaintiffs.

Ada Fernandez Johnson, Esq., Jonathan Rosser Tuttle, Esq., Debevoise & Plimpon LLP, Washington, DC.

Bruce E. Yannett, Esq., Elliot Greenfield, Esq., Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, New York, NY, For Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This Court issued an Opinion and Order on April 1, 2015 (the "April 1 Order") granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' amended complaint.[1] On April 15, 2015, defendants filed a motion for partial reconsideration on two discrete issues. First, defendants request that the Court find that every repetition of a particular statement regarding environmental approvals be dismissed as irrelevant, and therefore dismiss plaintiffs' claims relating to environmental approvals. Second, defendants request that the Court dismiss plaintiffs' section 10(b) claims against defendants Potter, Gonzales, and Kinver pursuant to Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders. Defendant Veenman also filed a motion to certify the April 1 Order for interlocutory appeal solely on the issue of the pleading ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.