The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, on remand from the United States Supreme Court, unanimously reversed the district court’s denial of a technology company’s (the “Company”) motion to dismiss claims brought under Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”).  Pirani v. Slack Techs., Inc., No. 20-16419 (9th Cir. Feb. 10, 2025).  The case turned on whether plaintiff sufficiently pleaded that he had standing to bring Securities Act claims in respect of a direct listing in which shares registered under an allegedly misleading registration statement were made available in the market alongside unregistered shares.  The Supreme Court, in a decision covered here, held that Section 11 requires plaintiffs to plead that they purchased securities traceable to the at-issue registration statement but did not address whether the complaint satisfied that requirement.  The Supreme Court also declined to address whether the complaint sufficiently alleged standing to pursue a claim under Section 12(a)(2).  We previously covered the Ninth Circuit’s now-vacated decision, the Supreme Court’s grant of the petition for certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit’s decision, and the parties’ oral argument before the Supreme Court.