TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ...........................................
iii
INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE..................................
1
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ..........................................................................
2
ARGUMENT...................................................................
3
I. “SCHEME” LIABILITY IS IMPROPERLY DERIVATIVE AND UNWORKABLE..................
3
A. Like Aiding-And-Abetting, “Scheme” Liability Is Derivative Of The Issuer’s Conduct..........
4
B. Scheme Liability Is Unworkable And Uncertain .................................................................
6
C. Deceptive Conduct By A Commercial Counterparty Requires A Duty To Disclose.......
9
II. THE IMPLIED CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER § 10(b) SHOULD NOT BE EXTENDED TO ENCOMPASS “SCHEME” LIABILITY ...............
13
A. “Scheme” Liability Would Nullify Statutory Restrictions On The Express Private Rights Of Action In The 1933 And 1934 Acts....................
15
B. “Scheme” Liability Would Nullify Statutory Provisions Intended To Be Enforceable Only By The Government ...........................................
19
C. “Scheme” Liability Cannot Be Reconciled With The Elements Of Primary Liability In A § 10(b) Cause Of Action.....................................
27
1. “Scheme” Liability Is Incompatible With Central Bank’s Reliance Requirement ..........
28
(i)
