a manipulative or deceptive act committed by someone else does not trigger liability under the Act. Id. at 191, 114 S.Ct. 1439. Actors can only be held liable under SEC Rule 10b-5 if they themselves “employ[ ] a manipulative device or make[ ] a material misstatement (or omission) on which a purchaser or seller of securities relies ...” Id. Pointing out that a plaintiff must show reliance on the defendant’s misstatement or omission to recover under Rule 10b-5, the court stated: “Were we to allow the aiding and abetting action proposed in this case, the defendant could be hable without any showing that the plaintiff relied upon the aider and abettor’s statements or actions.” Id. at 180, lowed this analysis. See, e.g., McNamara v. Bre-X Minerals, Ltd., 57 F.Supp.2d 396, 430 (E.D.Tex.1999) (<HOLDING>). The Second and Eleventh Circuits have held
holding that public utility company is not liable for inaccessible bus company it licenses where there is no contract between them holding that an independent engineering company that played a significant role in developing allegedly false statements made by a mineral exploration company could be held liable as a primary violator holding title company liable for bad faith holding that the plaintiff satisfied cariglia standard where witnesses testified that the false information played a significant role in the decisionmaking bodys ultimate determination holding that where company made statements constituting inability to pay orally at bargaining sessions company had duty to show its books to the union