Question: Intercontinental Widgets, Inc., had applied for a patent for a new state-of-the-art widget, which, if patented, would significantly increase the value of Inter-continentals shares. On
Intercontinental Widgets, Inc., had applied for a patent for a new state-of-the-art widget, which, if patented, would significantly increase the value of Inter-continental’s shares. On September 1, the Patent Office notified Jackson, the attorney for Inter-continental, that the patent application had been approved. After informing Kingsley, the president of Intercontinental, of the good news, Jackson called his
broker and purchased one thousand shares of Intercontinental at $18 per share. He also told his partner, Lucas, who immediately proceeded to purchase five hundred shares at $19 per share. Lucas then called his brother-in-law, Mammon, and told him the news. On September 3, Mammon bought four thousand shares at $21 per share. On September 4, Kingsley issued a press release which accurately reported that a patent had been granted to Intercontinental. The next day Inter continental’s stock soared to $38 per share. A class action suit is brought against Jackson, Lucas, Mammon, and Intercontinental for violations of Rule 10b–5. Who, if anyone, is liable?