Bright Line, Substantial Participation, or Something Else: Who is a Primary Violator Under Rule 10b-5?

This Note analyzes the competing theories currently used by courts and commentators to determine when a secondary actor’s conduct arises to the level of a primary violation under section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission rule 10b-5 on a theory of aiding and abetting primary violators. This Note proposes a workable and logical standard that can be used to differentiate a primary violation from mere aiding and abetting. Part I of the Note discusses the decision in Central Bank of Denver and the resulting dilemma that faced the lower courts in determining when a secondary actor is a primary violator. Part II provides an analytical discussion of the emergence of two tests often used to determine whether a secondary actor is a primary violator: the “bright line” and “substantial participation” tests. Finally, Part III discusses the elements of a primary violation of section 10(b) and rule 10b-5 as they relate to a secondary actor and proposes a workable and logical test to determine when a secondary actor’s conduct rises to the level of a primary violation

Stoneridge v. Scientific-Atlanta: Do Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 Require a Misstatement or Omission? (pre-publication draft)

This version is a draft submitted for publication and accepted prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling. The final version, published by QLR and also posted on Digital Commons, was modified subsequently to the Supreme Court ruling. Stoneridge v. Scientific-Atlanta promises to be the most important securities litigation case to reach the Supreme Court since Central Bank of Denver. In this important case, Stoneridge presents the Supreme Court with the opportunity to clarify the application of its ruling in Central Bank to liability for secondary actors under section 10(b) and rule 10b-5. This Article points out that the fundamental question plaguing the lower courts since Central Bank and resulting in two circuit splits is whether section 10(b) requires that a secondary actor actually make a misstatement or omission in order to be held liable under the rule 10b-5 implied cause of action. This Article asserts that there is ample support in Supreme Court precedent for concluding that the word “deceptive” in section 10(b) does require a misstatement or omission and that the Supreme Court should so hold in Stoneridge

Socioeconomic impact of photovoltaic power at Schuchuli, Arizona

The social and economic impact of photovoltaic power on a small, remote native American village is studied. Village history, group life, energy use in general, and the use of photovoltaic-powered appliances are discussed. No significant impacts due to the photovoltaic power system were observed

Shifting Weed Compositions and Biomass Production in Sweet Corn Field Treated with Organic Composts and Chemical Weed Controls

The objectives of the research were to study the shift of weed compositions in sweet corn field treated with organic compost and chemical weed controls and to compare the effect of treatment combinations on weed growth, weed biomass and sweet corn biomass. The research was conducted in Bengkulu, Indonesia, from April to July 2014. Results showed that the number of weed species decreased after the trials from 14 to 13. There was a shift in weed compositions because 5 species of weeds did not emerge after the trials, but 4 new species were found. Chemical weed control using a herbiside mixture of atrazine and mesotrione applied during postemergence was the most effective method to control weeds, which was observed on decreased weed emergence and weed biomas down to 22.33 and 25.00 percent of control, respectively. Subsequently, biomass production of sweet corn increased up to 195.64 percent with the same trials. Biomass of weeds and sweet corn were also affected by the organic composts. Weed biomass was inhibited with treatment of composted empty fruith bunches of oilpalm, whereas significantly increased of sweet corn biomass were observed in the plots of organic manure

A roadmap for China to peak carbon dioxide emissions and achieve a 20% share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy by 2030

As part of its Paris Agreement commitment, China pledged to peak carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions around 2030, striving to peak earlier, and to increase the non-fossil share of primary energy to 20% by 2030. Yet by the end of 2017, China emitted 28% of the world's energy-related CO2 emissions, 76% of which were from coal use. How China can reinvent its energy economy cost-effectively while still achieving its commitments was the focus of a three-year joint research project completed in September 2016. Overall, this analysis found that if China follows a pathway in which it aggressively adopts all cost-effective energy efficiency and CO2 emission reduction technologies while also aggressively moving away from fossil fuels to renewable and other non-fossil resources, it is possible to not only meet its Paris Agreement Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) commitments, but also to reduce its 2050 CO2 emissions to a level that is 42% below the country's 2010 CO2 emissions. While numerous barriers exist that will need to be addressed through effective policies and programs in order to realize these potential energy use and emissions reductions, there are also significant local environmental (e.g., air quality), national and global environmental (e.g., mitigation of climate change), human health, and other unquantified benefits that will be realized if this pathway is pursued in China

\u3ci\u3eBiden v. Nebraska\u3c/i\u3e: Student Loan Debt Forgiveness and the Dangers of the Administrative State

In April of 2020, then-candidate Joe Biden promised that, if he were elected to the Presidency, he would “[i]mmediately cancel a minimum of $10,000 of student debt per person, as proposed by Senator Warren in the midst of the coronavirus crisis.” Once in office, the Biden administration found that Congress would not pass the type of extensive student loan debt forgiveness that the President wanted. Accordingly, President Biden did what has become all too common in recent presidential administrations— he acted by executive fiat through an administrative agency to accomplish a policy goal that he could not get passed through Congress. The resultant Biden student loan forgiveness plan was challenged in the federal courts, eventually being decided by the United States Supreme Court as Biden v. Nebraska. In Biden v. Nebraska, the Court ruled that the Biden administration had exceeded its statutory authority by promulgating the plan. While this particular attempt to take action by executive fiat was thereby stymied, there is no indication that President Biden and future Presidents will cease trying to enact policy in this way. Further, the administrative state—of which action by executive fiat and the usurpation of legislative power by the Executive Branch is a concomitant part—continues to grow, posing a serious threat to our constitutional order, the rule of law, and our liberties guaranteed thereby. Only by returning to the Christian view of law and policy, which undergirds and provides the foundation for our constitutional system of government, can we hope to address the threat posed by the administrative state and again “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.