of the investors and the locus of the purchase decision. Plaintiffs highlight that many of the investors in the NY/OH Plaintiff class, including those who purchased BP ordinary shares, are U.S. residents. (Id., at 5.) In addition to the residency of the purchasers linking the shares to the United States, Plaintiffs claim that several “pivotal aspects of the purchases” — including the initial purchase decision — were made in the United States. (Id. at 6.) Plaintiffs’ second argument grasps at a technicality that Plaintiffs believe works in their favor: the LSE rules allow trades to occur directly through third-party, U.S.-based market makers. (Id., at 8.) Plaintiffs believe this raises an issue as to whether such a trade occurs “physically” in the United Sta 472-73 (S.D.N.Y.2010) (<HOLDING>); In re Infineon Techs. AG Sec. Litig., No. C
holding that morrison precludes securities claims brought by us investors who purchase securities on a foreign exchange even where those securities are also listed on a us exchange holding that section 10b does not extend to foreign securities traded on foreign exchanges even if purchased or sold by us investors and even if the foreign issuer had adrs listed on us exchanges recognizing defense in securities case holding that claims that debtor fraudulently induced claimants to retain debtors securities arise from the purchase or sale of those securities holding that claims brought under section 10b of the securities exchange act and rico claims were arbitrable