then consider any properly filed motion for appointment of lead plaintiff and approval of lead plaintiffs counsel. III. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, the motion for appointment of lead plaintiffs and the approval of lead plaintiffs’ attorney is denied without prejudice. An appropriate form of order is filed herewith. 1 . Although the plaintiff asserts claims under both the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, for ease of reference, the Court hereinafter will cite only to the PSLRA as codified in the Exchange Act at 15 U.S.C. § 78u-l. 2 . Defendants Chubb, Dean R. O'Hare, David B. Kelso, Henry B. Schram and Executive Risk Inc., represented by Wachtel Lipton 5, 109 (S.D.N.Y.2000) (same). See also Bolger v. First State Financial Srvs., 759 F.Supp. 182, 192-93 (D.N.J.1991) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co., 396
holding that misrepresentation was essential to plaintiffs claim holding that a plaintiff alleging securities fraud must show that a defendant 1 made a material misrepresentation or a material omission as to which he or she had a duty to speak 2 with scienter 3 in connection with the purchase or sale of securities holding that in order to make out a claim under  14a of the exchange act a plaintiff must show that a proxy statement contained a material misrepresentation or omission that the plaintiff was injured by the material misrepresentation or omission and that the proxy solicitation itself rather than the particular defect in the solicitation materials was an essential link in the accomplishment of the transaction  holding that to satisfy the element of specific intent to defraud needed to convict for mail fraud the government must show that the defendant knowingly made a material misrepresentation or knowingly omitted a material fact for the purpose of inducing the victim of the fraud to part with property or undertake some action that he would not otherwise do absent the misrepresentation or omission holding that slusa preempts claims which allege a material misrepresentation or omission in connection with the purchase or sale of securities whether or not that allegation is an element of or otherwise necessary to the putative state claim