Lawson v. Fmr Llc.
| Decision Date | 28 July 2010 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action Nos. 08-10466-DPW, 08-10758-DPW. |
| Citation | 724 F.Supp.2d 167 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
| Parties | Jackie Hosang LAWSON, Plaintiff, v. FMR LLC, dba Fidelity Investments; FMR Corp., dba Fidelity Investments; and Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC, dba Fidelity Investments, Defendants. Jonathan M. Zang, Plaintiff, v. Fidelity Management & Research Company, FMR Co., Inc., and FMR LLC f/k/a FMR Corp., Defendants. |
724 F.Supp.2d 167
Jackie Hosang LAWSON, Plaintiff,
v.
FMR LLC, dba Fidelity Investments; FMR Corp., dba Fidelity Investments; and Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC, dba Fidelity Investments, Defendants.
Jonathan M. Zang, Plaintiff,
v.
Fidelity Management & Research Company, FMR Co., Inc., and FMR LLC f/k/a FMR Corp., Defendants.
Civil Action Nos. 08-10466-DPW, 08-10758-DPW.
United States District Court,D. Massachusetts.
July 28, 2010.
Indira Talwani, Segal Roitman, LLP, Boston, MA, for Plaintiff.
Eugene Scalia, Jennifer J. Schulp, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC, Wilfred J. Benoit, Jr., Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA, for Defendant.
Jonathan M. Zang, Boston, MA, pro se.
I have found that the Plaintiffs in these two cases, involving allegations of unlawful retaliation against employees of nonpublic companies in the mutual fund industry, state a claim of violation of the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”). Lawson v. FMR LLC, 724 F.Supp.2d 141, 2010 WL 1345153 (D.Mass. Mar. 31, 2010). The Defendants have moved that the dispositive issue of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act's applicability be certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) for interlocutory appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
Certifications under § 1292(b) are not looked upon with favor by the First Circuit. See, e.g., Camacho v. P.R. Ports Auth., 369 F.3d 570, 573 (1st Cir.2004) (characterizing appeals under § 1292(b) as “hen's-teeth rare”). Indeed, after twenty-four years as a District Judge within the Circuit, I cannot recall an occasion in which I have been willing to make a § 1292(b) certification. Cf. McLellan Highway Corp. v. United States, 95 F.Supp.2d 1, 13 (D.Mass.2000) (determining that even when “holding, without an explicit ruling from the Court itself, that prior First Circuit precedent is no longer applicable,” the “better procedure, I believe, is to frame the issue clearly for ... appellate review of a final decision of this court” rather than using the “artificially cumbersome” interlocutory certification process under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b)). Nevertheless, after careful and extended consideration, 1 I have determined that certification is appropriate in these cases.
Section 1292(b) permits certification of controlling questions of law, as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion, the immediate appeal of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Lawson v. FMR LLC
-
Lawson v. FMR LLC
...court granted the motion, certified a “controlling question of law” to this court, and stayed the cases before it. Lawson v. FMR LLC, 724 F.Supp.2d. 167, 169 (D.Mass.2010). The defendants petitioned this court for interlocutory review, and the plaintiffs each filed cross-petitions urging th......
-
Hood ex rel. Mississippi v. Fresenius Med. Care Holdings, Inc. (In re Fresenius Granuflo/ Naturalyte Dialysate Prods. Liab. Litig.), MDL No. 13–02428–DPW.
...I have been willing to make a § 1292(b) certification,” other than in the case where I first made that observation. Lawson v. FMR LLC, 724 F.Supp.2d 167, 168 (D.Mass.2010). The singularity of that one occasion is underscored by the subsequent history of that case. It initially led to a reve......
-
Leshinsky v. Telvent Git, S.A.
...text [was] far from pellucid.” Lawson v. FMR LLC, 724 F.Supp.2d 141, 152–53 (D.Mass.2010), motion to certify appeal granted,724 F.Supp.2d 167 (D.Mass.2010), rev'd in part,670 F.3d 61 (1st Cir.2012). The text of Section 806 (pre-amendment) did not explicitly mandate whether employees of non-......
-
The Changing Securities Law Landscape for Private Entities: Practitioners Beware
...141, 145 (Mass. 2010) (joint order). [21] Id. at 147. [22] 15 USC § 780(d). [23] Lawson, 134 S.Ct. at 1161, 1171. [24] Lawson, 724 F.Supp.2d at 167. [25] Lawson v. FMR LLC, 670 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2012). [26] Id. at 68. [27] Id. at 68, 73. [28] See Brady v. Calyon Securities (USA), 406 F.Supp......