[Opinion begins on page 9 of the linked document.] "The Court now holds that the Ninth Circuit failed to properly evaluate the complaint.... The Ninth Circuit ... failed to assess whether the complaint in its current form 'has plausibly alleged' that a prudent fiduciary in the same position 'could not have concluded' that the alternative action 'would do more harm than good.' ... The Ninth Circuit's proposition that removing the Amgen Common Stock Fund from the list of investment options was an alternative action that could plausibly have satisfied Fifth Third's standards may be true. If so, the facts and allegations supporting that proposition should appear in the stockholders' complaint. Having examined the complaint, the Court has not found sufficient facts and allegations to state a claim for breach of the duty of prudence." [Amgen Inc. v. Harris, No. 15-278 (U.S. Jan. 25, 2016; per curiam)]  MORE >>