Silicon Graphics Inc. et al v. McCracken et al
| Decision Date | 02 July 1999 |
| Docket Number | 9,97-16204 |
| Parties | In re: SILICON GRAPHICS INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION EDMUND J. JANAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EDWARD R. McCRACKEN; MICHAEL RAMSAY; ROBERT K. BURGESS; THOMAS J. OSWALD; TERUYASU SEKIMOTO; FOREST BASKETT; STEPHEN GOGGIANO; WILLIAM M. KELLY; LUCILLE SHAPIRO; SILICON GRAPHICS, INC., Defendants-Appellees. DEANNA BRODY; ANDREA S. DONALD; ISRAEL BUCK; RUTH BUCK; DENISE STRUTHERS; THOMAS G. DI CICCO IRA; STEVEN B. EWALL; ROSALYN GOLAINE; JERRY KRIM;MARY ANNE BEKE; HERMAN GROSSMAN; SAMUEL J. REINER; DENNIS LUCAS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EDWARD R. McCRACKEN; MICHAEL RAMSAY; ROBERT K. BURGESS; THOMAS J. OSWALD; TERUYASU SEKIMOTO; FOREST BASKETT; STEPHEN GOGGIANO; WILLIAM M. KELLY; LUCILLE SHAPIRO; SILICON GRAPHICS, INC., Defendants-Appellees.o. 97-16240 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Before: BROWNING, SNEED, Circuit Judges, and RHOADES1, District Judge.
The panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judge Browning would grant the petition for rehearing. Judge Sneed and Judge Rhoades recommended rejecting the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Judge Browning voted to accept the suggestion for rehearing en banc.
The full court was advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. An active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. FED. R. APP. P. 35(b). Judge Reinhardt dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc, joined by Judges Pregerson and Tashima. Judges Hawkins and Graber join in Part I of Judge Reinhardt's dissent. The petition for rehearing is DENIED and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is REJECTED. All other pending motions are denied.
1 The Honorable John S. Rhoades, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Villalvazo v. America's Servicing Co.
...in the complaint and matters that may be judicially noticed pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201. In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Sec. Litig., 183 F.3d 970, 986 (9th Cir. 1999); Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001). For all of these reasons, it is only under extraor......
-
McGovney v. Aerohive Networks, Inc.
...Without this information, it is difficult to assess the falsity of Defendants' statements. See, e.g. , In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Sec. Litig. , 183 F.3d 970, 985 (9th Cir. 1999) (affirming dismissal where allegations lacking "specifics" invited the court to "speculate" as to the "severity ......
-
Silver State Broad., LLC v. Beasley FM Acquisition Corp.
...not physically attached to the pleading, may be considered in ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss." In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Sec. Litig., 183 F.3d 970, 986 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Branch v. Tunnell, 14 F.3d 449, 454 (9th Cir. 1994)). In Iqbal, the Supreme Court recently clarifie......