United States Sixth Circuit

The district court was correct in holding that a complaint did not contain allegations sufficient to give rise to the strong inference of scienter that is required under the heightened pleading requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, and dismissal was proper where proposed amendments would be futile.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/20/2003
• Decided 10/08/2003
• Published 10/08/2003

Judges

• Before: DAUGHTREY and ROGERS, Circuit Judges;  QUIST, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Lionel Z. Glancy (briefed), Robin Howald (argued and briefed), Glancy & Binkow, Los Angeles, CA, E. Powell Miller (briefed), Mantese Miller & Shea, Troy, MI, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Andrew J. McGuinness (briefed), Dykema Gossett, Ann Arbor, MI, Carl H. Von Ende (briefed), Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone, Detroit, MI, Timothy A. Nelsen (briefed), Donna L. McDevitt (argued and briefed), Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Chicago, IL, for Defendants-Appellees.