Case Citator › In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Securities Litigation

In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Securities Litigation

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Ninth Circuit
Citation
183 F.3d 970
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
85 of 85
Citing cases (total)
796
Treatment dates
2008
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Securities Litigation has been abrogated in part: all 85 flagged citations have been read, and the confirmed treatment is listed below. South Ferry LP, No. 2 v. Killinger held that Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd. displaced Silicon Graphics's allegation-by-allegation PSLRA methodology: courts must consider imprecise allegations together in a holistic scienter analysis.
More on how this was screened

South Ferry retained Silicon Graphics's deliberate-recklessness standard and its demand for detailed factual pleading in ordinary cases. The other reviewed opinions applied those surviving scienter rules or Silicon Graphics's unaffected incorporation-by-reference, insider-stock-sale, and derivative-demand holdings, or copied history parentheticals reporting the South Ferry treatment. References to statutory supersession did not identify a separate legislative displacement of a specific holding. Duplicate copies of the same opinion were reviewed without creating duplicate entries.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

796 later cases cite In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Securities Litigation; 85 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Securities Litigation?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • Following Tellabs, the Ninth Circuit abrogated Silicon Graphics's categorical rejection of vague or general scienter allegations and required courts to consider such allegations together as part of a holistic PSLRA analysis.

    South Ferry LP, No. 2 v. Killinger · Ninth Circuit · filed

    However, the Supreme Court’s recent Tellabs decision also discusses the level of detail required under the PSLRA, and with its controlling and persuasive weight, it suggests that perhaps Silicon Graphics, Vantive, and Read-Rite are too demanding and focused too narrowly in dismissing vague, ambiguous, or general allegations outright. ... We conclude that this position is correct in light of Tellabs. The Supreme Court’s reasoning in Tellabs permits a series of less precise allegations to be read together to meet the PSLRA requirement, the prior holdings of Silicon Graphics, Vantive, and Read-Rite notwithstanding.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads In re Silicon Graphics Inc. Securities Litigation and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace