claims under various [Bankruptcy] Code provisions” when the debtor seeks to bring other claims, such as common-law claims. Id. Similarly, we have held that a reservation of “any claims ... arising under Chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code or any similar provisions of state law” is not sufficiently specific to reserve state-law claims for fraud or breach of fiduciary duty; the reference to “state law” is too general. In re SI Restructuring, 714 F.3d at 865. However, a reservation of claims is effective if it identifies the nature of the claims reserved and the class of potential defendants against whom those claims might be pursued — a precise identification of each individual potential defendant is unnecessary. See In re Tex. Wyo. Drilling, Inc., 647 F.3d 547, 549, 551-52 (5th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). The law may well be different in the Ninth
holding majority shareholder liable when he used his control of the board for the malicious purpose of  preventing dividends and otherwise lowering the value  of the stock of the minority shareholders holding sufficient a reservation of claims against  various prepetition shareholders of the debtor who might be sued for fraudulent transfer and recovery of dividends paid to shareholders  holding that derivative actions do not require the support of a majority of shareholders or even all of the minority shareholders holding a shareholders cause of action accrued for statute of limitations purposes when shareholders and directors of a company asserted a right to stock which was hostile to the plaintiffs claim to the stock holding that the trustee could not bring a claim against sole shareholders of bankrupt corporation where shareholders had not looted or otherwise injured the corporation