PSLRA Provisions - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 16
About This Presentation
Title:

PSLRA Provisions

Description:

Chairman Levitt's compromise awry. Focus only on President's Veto ... Assumptions underlying any of the above. Report of outside reviewer retained by issuer ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:36
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 17
Provided by: haroldsbl
Category:
Tags: pslra | awry | provisions

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: PSLRA Provisions


1
PSLRA Provisions
  • Section 27A 33 Act 21E of 34 Act
  • Extensive legislative history
  • Rewritten in Conference Committee
  • Chairman Levitts compromise awry
  • Focus only on Presidents Veto
  • Provision in both Acts identical
  • Definition of forward-looking
  • Availability
  • Exclusions
  • Three prongs of safe-harbor

2
Definition of Forward-Looking Statement
  • Projection of revenues,income(loss), EPS(loss),
    cap expend, dividends, other financial items
  • Plans for future operations, products, services
  • Future economic performance, MDA
  • Assumptions underlying any of the above
  • Report of outside reviewer retained by issuer
    assessing FLS made by the issuer

3
Available to FLS Made by
  • An issuer that is a reporting company
  • A person acting on behalf of such issuer
  • Retained outside reviewer making statement on
    behalf of the issuer
  • An underwriter
  • With respect to info provided by such issuer
  • Or with respect to info derived from information
    provided by such issuer

4
Significant Exclusions
  • IPOs, tender offers, going private, Schedule
    13Ds, investment companies
  • Included in GAAP financial statements
  • Direct participation programs, penny stock
    issuer, blank check offfering, role-ups
  • Issuers w/3 years found guilty of wide range of
    crimes, or
  • Issuer enjoined, ordered to cease or desist, or
    otherwise determined to have violated antifraud
    provisions

5
Safe Harbor in actions alleging false or
misleading statement
  • Meaningful cautionary statement prong
  • Statement identified as FLS
  • Accompanied by meaningful cautionary statements
    identifying important factors that
  • Could cause actual results to differ materially
  • Conference Committee on meaningful
  • Boiler plate will not suffice
  • Must convey substantive information re factors
  • Realistically could cause results to differ
    materially
  • Such as information about issuers business

6
Clintons License to Lie Agrument
  • Three prongs are disjunctive (or)
  • Not liable as to FLS if and to extent
  • Meaningful cautionary statements, or
  • Immateriality, or
  • Plaintiff fails to prove was made with actual
    knowledge was false or misleading
  • Ergo if meaningful cautionary statement prong
    satisfied, do not get to whether knew was false
    or misleading
  • See IvaxSec. 5.20

7
Conference Committee and Cautionary Statements vs
Intent
  • Veto Message Stressed Conf. Comm. Statement
  • Required to identify important factors, but not
    all
  • Failure to include ultimate cause not fatal
  • Standard upon which a court may decide MTD
    without examining the state of mind of the
    defendant
  • First prong court only to examine cautionary
    statements
  • Courts should not examine the state of mind of
    the person making the statement
  • Can there be meaningful cautionary statements
    without disclosing undermining factors?

8
The Actual Knowledge ProngWhose Actual Knowledge?
  • If made by natural personhis/her
  • In made by an entity
  • Made by or with approval exec. Officer
  • With actual knowledge of the officer
  • Probably not intended to distinguish between sole
    proprietor and entity
  • Individual making representation liable if has
    knowledgebut who makes
  • Entity liable only if with approval of E.O.

9
When is a FLS False or Misleading?
  • By its nature accuracy of FLS not knowable
  • Apple Computer (9th Cir. 1989) implied rep
  • Representation genuinely believed
  • Reasonable basis for the belief
  • Not aware of facts seriously undermine
    representation
  • SECs Rule 175/3b-6
  • Plaintiff has burden prove do not have reasonable
    basis
  • Or were not made in good faith
  • Legislative history discloses dissatisfaction
    with R.175
  • One reason for PSLRA safe harbor/encourage FLS

10
Possible Reconciliation
  • Must be some standard to measure cautionary
    statements that have to be included
  • Not adequate if dont include undermining factors
  • Dont examine state of mind to determine whether
    cautionary factors adequate
  • But if dont include serious undermining factors
  • Then go to the actual knowledge prong and
  • Determine if appropriate person had actual
    knowledge
  • See Commissions amicus brief in Ivax-sec. 5.20

11
Pleading Actual Knowledge
  • Plaintiff appears to have burdenproof
  • Since involves state of mind in 10b-5 action
    strong inference applicable
  • In Section 11 is Rule 9(b) applicable
  • Now it involves fraud should be
  • 9th Cir-plead generally 2d strong infer
  • Changes Sec. 11 burden/proof/standard
  • Not only as to officers and directors
  • But as to the underwriter

12
Pleading Actual Knowledge in Enron
  • What was wrong at par. 985-everything
  • Related to Enron Defendants (O D)
  • Speaker knew (who is the speaker)
  • Authorized etc.-relevant to Enron Enron in
    bankruptcy not defend
  • Harmons opinion related to secondary actors
  • None of them are Enron defendants
  • Refers to analysts statements safe harbor
  • Seem to say safe harbor doesnt apply if fraud
  • Equates fraudrecklessness rather than actual
    knowledge

13
Oral Forward-Looking Statements
  • Applicable to issuer or persons making statement
    on behalf of issuer
  • Stated is a Forward-Looking Statement
  • Actual results could differ mat. from projected
  • Additional cautionary factors available in
    readily available written document
  • Identifies the document
  • Information in document satisfies (1)(A)
  • Any document filed with SEC or generally
    disseminated is readily available
  • Queryoral FLS by underwriters

14
Second Prong--Immateriality
  • Would be applicable in any event
  • Specifically included to cover
  • Puffery
  • General Statements of Optimism
  • Market already knows statements
  • Soft statements??

15
Rule 175/3b-6
  • Come in play as to excluded FLS
  • Must be in filed document or in some instances
    reaffirmed in a filed document
  • E.g. IPO
  • Places burden of proof on plaintiff to establish
    no reasonable basis or not made in good fatih

16
Other Matters
  • Safe Harbor Not Applicable to
  • Statements of Historical Facts
  • Statements of Existing Facts
  • Statements in GAAP Financials
  • Consideration of cautionary statements referenced
    by defendant
  • Stay of discovery on motion for summary judgment
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com