WSGR logoWSGR logo
WSGR logo
  • Experience
  • People
  • Insights
  • About Us
  • Careers

  • Practice Areas
  • Industries

  • Corporate
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Patents and Innovations
  • Regulatory
  • Technology Transactions

  • Capital Markets
  • Corporate Governance
  • Corporate Life Sciences
  • Derivatives
  • Emerging Companies and Venture Capital
  • Employee Benefits and Compensation
  • Energy and Climate Solutions
  • Executive Advisory Program
  • Finance and Structured Finance
  • Fund Formation
  • Greater China
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Private Equity
  • Public Company Representation
  • Real Estate
  • Restructuring
  • Shareholder Engagement and Activism
  • Tax
  • U.S. Expansion
  • Wealthtech

  • Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs)

  • Environmental, Social, and Governance

  • AI and Data Center Infrastructure
  • Energy Regulation and Competition
  • Project Development and M&A
  • Project Finance and Tax Credit Transactions
  • Sustainability and Decarbonization
  • Transportation Electrification

  • U.S. Expansion Library and Resources

  • Post-Grant Review
  • Trademark and Advertising

  • Antitrust Litigation
  • Arbitration
  • Board and Internal Investigations
  • Class Action Litigation
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Consumer Litigation
  • Corporate Governance Litigation
  • Employment Litigation
  • Executive Branch Updates
  • Government Investigations
  • Internet Strategy and Litigation
  • Patent Litigation
  • Securities Litigation
  • State Attorneys General
  • Supreme Court and Appellate Practice
  • Trade Secret Litigation
  • Trademark and Copyright Litigation
  • Trial
  • White Collar Crime

  • Advertising, Promotions, and Marketing
  • Antitrust and Competition
  • Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS)
  • Communications
  • Data, Privacy, and Cybersecurity
  • Export Control and Sanctions
  • FCPA and Anti-Corruption
  • FDA Regulatory, Healthcare, and Consumer Products
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • Fintech and Financial Services
  • Government Contracts
  • National Security and Trade
  • Payments
  • State Attorneys General
  • Strategic Risk and Crisis Management
  • Tariffs, Customs, and Import Compliance

  • Antitrust and Intellectual Property
  • Antitrust Civil Enforcement
  • Antitrust Compliance and Business Strategy
  • Antitrust Criminal Enforcement
  • Antitrust Litigation
  • Antitrust Merger Clearance
  • European Competition Law
  • Third-Party Merger and Non-Merger Antitrust Representation

  • Anti-Money Laundering
  • Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI)
  • Team Telecom

  • AI in Healthcare
  • Animal Health
  • Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
  • Aviation
  • Biotech
  • Blockchain and Cryptocurrency
  • Clean Energy
  • Climate and Clean Technologies
  • Communications and Networking
  • Consumer Products and Services
  • Data Storage and Cloud
  • Defense Tech
  • Diagnostics, Life Science Tools, and Deep Tech
  • Digital Health
  • Digital Media and Entertainment
  • Electronic Gaming
  • Fintech and Financial Services
  • FoodTech and AgTech
  • Global Generics
  • Internet
  • Life Sciences
  • Medical Devices
  • Mobile Devices
  • Mobility
  • NewSpace
  • Quantum Computing
  • Semiconductors
  • Software

  • Offices
  • Country Desks
  • Events
  • Community
  • Our Diversity
  • Sustainability
  • Our Values
  • Board of Directors
  • Management Team

  • Austin
  • Boston
  • Boulder
  • Brussels
  • Century City
  • Hong Kong
  • London
  • Los Angeles
  • New York
  • Palo Alto
  • Salt Lake City
  • San Diego
  • San Francisco
  • Seattle
  • Shanghai
  • Washington, D.C.
  • Wilmington, DE

  • Law Students
  • Judicial Clerks
  • Experienced Attorneys
  • Patent Agents
  • Business Professionals
  • Alternative Legal Careers
  • Contact Recruiting
Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Securities Class Action Against Align Technology
Client Highlights
May 5, 2017

On May 5, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a securities class action filed against Align Technology, maker of the Invisalign teeth aligning system. The significant opinion is the first time the Ninth Circuit has ruled that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Ind. Pension Fund, which articulated the standards for pleading falsity of opinions, applies to Section 10(b) fraud claims of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. It is also the first goodwill accounting case that the Ninth Circuit has decided, holding that judgments about goodwill accounting should be treated as opinion statements. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati represented Align Technology and its former CEO and CFO in the matter.

The case arose from an announcement by Align Technology in 2011 concerning its decision to acquire Cadent Holdings. The original complaint was filed in December 2012 in which the plaintiff—the City of Dearborn Heights Act 345 Police & Fire Retirement System, who represented all the investors who purchased stock in Align Technology between January 31, 2012 to October 17, 2012—alleged that Align and the individual defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 in connection with statements regarding Align's goodwill valuation of Cadent Holdings. In August 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed, with prejudice, the plaintiff's second amended complaint for failure to adequately plead both falsity and scienter. Plaintiff appealed.

In October 2016, the plaintiff argued before the Ninth Circuit federal appellate panel, claiming that the lower court erred when it dismissed the plaintiff's second amended complaint and asserting that the district court analyzed fact-based statements as opinion statements. The plaintiff also alleged that the district court imposed a heightened standard for determining the falsity of "goodwill" statements about Cadent's value made by Align.

Writing on behalf of the Ninth Circuit, Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr., affirmed the district court's dismissal, holding that the three standards for pleading falsity of opinion statements articulated in the U.S. Supreme Court's Omnicare decision apply to Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 claims. The panel also held that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently plead falsity under any of the three Omnicare standards and also failed to sufficiently plead scienter.

The Wilson Sonsini team representing Align Technology in the matter was led by partner Caz Hashemi and included associate Nick Miller.

For more information, please refer to the Ninth Circuit's opinion.

  • people
  • insights
  • about us
  • careers
  • Binder
  • Alumni
  • Mailing List Signup
  • Client FTP Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Accessibility
WSGR logo
Twitter
LinkedIn
Facebook
Instagram
Youtube
Copyright © 2026 Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. All Rights Reserved.