of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security. 17 C.F.R. § 240.1Ob-5 (2000); cf. NRS 90.570(2) and (3). 13 See Paracor Finance v. General Elec. Capital Corp., 96 F.3d 1151, 1157 (9th Cir. 1996) (stating that “[t]he elements of a Rule 10b-5 claim are: (1) a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact, (2) reliance, (3) scienter, and (4) resulting damages”); see also Shivers v. Amerco, 670 F.2d 826, 831 (9th Cir. 1982) (stating that “[t P.2d 977, 982 (Idaho 1995) (<HOLDING>); State, Dept. of Finance v. Tenney, 858 P.2d
holding that the challenge to the sign code is moot because the original code was repealed and superseded and there was no reasonable likelihood the city would reenact the old code holding obscenity statute required proof of scienter holding that the state need not make a showing of scienter under idaho code  3014032 and 3 cf nrs 905702 and 3 holding that members of idaho state board of medicine their staff and their counsel were entitled to absolute immunity under butz and mishler holding child molesting statute required proof of scienter