Supreme Court Review 2016/2017 TERM
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2017
CLICK HERE TO TRACK THIS CASE

Issue:  Insider-Trading Liability

Salman v. United States

15-628

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED

1. Does the personal benefit to the insider that is necessary to establish insider trading under Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646 (1983), require proof of "an exchange that is objective, consequential, and represents at least a potential gain of a pecuniary or similarly valuable nature," as the Second Circuit held in United States v. Newman, 773 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2014), cert. denied, No. 15-137 (U.S. Oct. 5, 2015), or is it enough that the insider and the tippee shared a close family relationship, as the Ninth Circuit held in this case?

2. Can failure to investigate suspicious circumstances, without more, constitute the "deliberate actions" to avoid knowledge that this Court found necessary to establish willful blindness in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 131 S. Ct. 2060 (2011)?

DECISION

Decided December 6, 2016 HOLDING

The Ninth Circuit properly applied Dirks to affirm Salman’s conviction. Under Dirks, the jury could infer that the tipper here personally benefited from making a gift of confidential information to a trading relative.

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Text of Opinion
pdf download

ORAL ARGUMENT

Argued October 5, 2016

Appearences
On Behalf of Petitioner Bassam Yacoub Salman
Alexandra A. E. Shapiro
On Behalf of United States United States
Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor GenĀ­eral, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
Transcript
pdf download
Audio
mp3 download

CERTIORARI STAGE

Granted January 19, 2016

Certiorari Stage Documents
      Petition for Certiorari (pdf download)
Brief in Opposition (pdf download)
Petitioner's Reply (pdf download)

PROCEEDING BELOW

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 6, 2015
pdf download