<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
        xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
        xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
        xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
        xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
        xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
        xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
        >
<channel>
        <title>Governance &#38; Securities Watch - Feed</title>
        <atom:link href="https://governance.weil.com/contributor/sebastian-laguna/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://governance.weil.com/contributor/sebastian-laguna/</link>
        <description>What&#039;s New: Updates from Weil’s Governance, Securities &#38; Reporting Group</description>
        <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2026 15:47:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <language></language>
        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
        
                                        <item>
                        <title>Supreme Court Rejects Attempt to Erode Section 11 Requirements</title>
                        <link>https://governance.weil.com/insights/supreme-court-rejects-attempt-to-erode-section-11-requirements/</link>
                        <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2023 19:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
                        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Stern]]></dc:creator>
													<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Perry ]]></dc:creator>
														<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Josh Wesneski ]]></dc:creator>
														<dc:creator><![CDATA[ Sebastian Laguna ]]></dc:creator>
							                        <guid isPermaLink="false">https://governance.weil.com/?p=1960</guid>
                        <description><![CDATA[On June 1, the Supreme Court held in Slack Technologies v. Pirani that Section 11 of the Securities Act “requires a plaintiff to plead and prove that he purchased shares traceable to the allegedly defective registration statement,” endorsing the approach previously adopted by a majority of lower courts. The case stemmed from Slack’s 2019 direct listing of registered and unregistered shares. Pirani sued Slack under Section 11 of the Securities Act alleging that Slack included materially misleading statements in the registration statement. Slack moved to dismiss the complaint because the direct listing had included unregistered shares, and Pirani had not alleged that the shares he purchased were from the 118 million shares registered under the allegedly misleading registration statement, as opposed to the 165 million pre-existing and unregistered shares that were sold in the direct listing. The district court denied Slack’s motion to dismiss and the Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that Pirani did not need to plead that his shares were traceable to Slack’s registration statement.]]></description>
                        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On June 1, the Supreme Court held in&#160;Slack Technologies v. Pirani&#160;that Section 11 of the Securities Act “requires a plaintiff to plead and prove that he purchased shares traceable to the allegedly defective registration statement,” endorsing the approach previously adopted by a majority of lower courts. The case stemmed from Slack’s 2019 direct listing of [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://governance.weil.com/insights/supreme-court-rejects-attempt-to-erode-section-11-requirements/">&lt;strong&gt;Supreme Court Rejects Attempt to Erode Section 11 Requirements&lt;/strong&gt;</a> appeared first on <a href="https://governance.weil.com">Governance &amp; Securities Watch</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
                                                                </item>
        </channel>
</rss>