Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Oct. 27, 2023

Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. Amgen Inc.

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:23-cv-02138
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSecurities
In one sentence

In Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. Amgen Inc., Judge Cronan scheduled a conference about a possible stay related to Macquarie.

Who this affects

The lead plaintiff, the defendants, and their counsel, who were directed to prepare for the scheduled conference.

What happened

In Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. Amgen Inc., the court noted that the Supreme Court had agreed to review whether certain disclosure failures can support a private securities-fraud claim.

The court scheduled a November 1, 2023, telephone conference for the lead plaintiff’s and defendants’ lawyers to discuss the Supreme Court case’s potential effect and whether this case should be paused. The parties could, but did not have to, submit short letters before the conference.

Judge John P. Cronan issued the order on October 27, 2023. The opinion does not decide whether the case will be paused or resolve the underlying claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. Amgen Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-02138
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Oct. 27, 2023

Background

The court stated that on September 29, 2023, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation v. Moab Partners, L.P. The question in that case was whether failing to make a disclosure required by Item 303 could support a private claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act even when there was no otherwise misleading statement.

Order

The court scheduled a conference for November 1, 2023, at 4:30 p.m. Counsel for the lead plaintiff and defendants were directed to be prepared to discuss the possible effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in Macquarie and whether this case should be paused while that decision was pending. Unless the court ordered otherwise, the conference would be held by telephone and attended by the attorney who would serve as principal trial counsel. The parties were invited, but not required, to submit letters of no more than three single-spaced pages by October 31, 2023, at 5:00 p.m.

What the Order Did Not Decide

Judge John P. Cronan did not decide whether to pause the case, interpret Section 10(b) on the merits, or resolve any claim. The opinion is a scheduling and case-management order, not a decision on the parties’ underlying dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.