Case Problem:
Plaintiff Simmonds alleged that the defendant investment banks violated Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act by engaging in short-swing transactions with 54 defendant issuing companies. Simmonds asserted that the companies “engaged in improper research-related activities that were designed to infl ate the market price of the shares and that these allegations establish that the Underwriters and Insiders acted as a group and coordinated their conduct with respect to acquiring the Issuing Companies’ stock, holding the stock, and disposing of the stock to share in the profits gained.” Thirty of the issuing companies (the moving issuers) argued that Simmond’s claims of short-swing transactions were time-barred and that Simmonds failed to submit adequate demand letters to the companies before she fi led suit against them. The district court granted the request of the moving issuers, “based on the inadequacy of Simmonds’s demand letters.” Simmonds appealed. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s decision that Simmonds’s demand letters to 30 of the issuing companies, the moving issuers, were inadequate. Do you agree with the ruling of the district court and appellate court? Why or why not? [ Simmonds v. Credit Suisse Secs., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24634.]
Your answer must be, typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), one-inch margins on all sides, APA format and also include references.