Filed: Sep. 30, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2014
Summary: ORDER KEITH P. ELLISON, District Judge. Pending before the Court is Defendants' Amended Second Tranche Consolidated Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. Nos. 48, 55.) 1 Having reviewed the original motion (Doc. No. 22), the amended motion, Plaintiffs' response (Doc. Nos. 66, 72), Defendants' reply (Doc. Nos. 78, 80), all papers in support thereof, and having heard oral argument, the Court finds that Defendants' Motion (Doc. Nos. 48, 55) must be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Pursuant to the rea
Summary: ORDER KEITH P. ELLISON, District Judge. Pending before the Court is Defendants' Amended Second Tranche Consolidated Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. Nos. 48, 55.) 1 Having reviewed the original motion (Doc. No. 22), the amended motion, Plaintiffs' response (Doc. Nos. 66, 72), Defendants' reply (Doc. Nos. 78, 80), all papers in support thereof, and having heard oral argument, the Court finds that Defendants' Motion (Doc. Nos. 48, 55) must be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Pursuant to the reas..
More
ORDER
KEITH P. ELLISON, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Defendants' Amended Second Tranche Consolidated Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. Nos. 48, 55.)1 Having reviewed the original motion (Doc. No. 22), the amended motion, Plaintiffs' response (Doc. Nos. 66, 72), Defendants' reply (Doc. Nos. 78, 80), all papers in support thereof, and having heard oral argument, the Court finds that Defendants' Motion (Doc. Nos. 48, 55) must be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Pursuant to the reasoning articulated in the Memoranda and Orders issued this day in three related cases— Avalon Holdings, Inc. et al. v. B.P. p.l.c. et al. [12-cv-3715] (the "Avalon Holdings Opinion"); Mondrian Global Equity Fund, L.P. et al. v. BP p.l.c. et al. [12-cv-3621] (the "Mondrian Opinion"); and New York City Employees' Retirement System et al. v. BP p.l.c. et al. [13-cv-1393] (the "New York Opinion")—the Court GRANTS the Amended Motion to Dismiss as to the following claims:
• All negligent misstatement claims.
• All claims based on Andrew Inglis's statements made in the 2008 Strategy Presentation on February 27, 2008. (Doc. Nos. 18, 19 (the "Stichting Compl."), at ¶ 352(b).)
• All claims based on statements made in the May 20, 2010 press release and Form 6-K. (Id. ¶ 434.)
• All claims based on statements made in the May 24, 2010 press release and Form 6-K. (Id. ¶ 441.)
• All Section 20(a) claims asserted against Mr. Inglis and David Rainey.
There being no remaining claims against Mr. Rainey, he is DISMISSED. In all other respects, the Motion is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
