Supreme Court Deliberates on Nvidia’s Bid to Halt Investor Lawsuit Over Cryptocurrency

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court delved into Nvidia Corp.’s appeal in a securities fraud case that could impact how corporate accountability is pursued in American courts. Nvidia, a key player in artificial intelligence and computing, is fighting a lawsuit that claims it misled investors about the extent of its sales linked to the unpredictable cryptocurrency market, according to Reuters. The high-stakes hearing addresses whether private investors face barriers too steep to hold corporations liable for alleged misinformation affecting stock values.

The lawsuit in question, which traces back to 2018, is led by Stockholm-based investment firm E. Ohman J:or Fonder AB. The plaintiffs allege that Nvidia downplayed the role cryptocurrency demand played in its revenue, despite the sector’s notorious volatility. This case, alongside another ongoing Supreme Court case involving Meta’s Facebook, could establish new legal precedents, making it more difficult for shareholders to bring securities fraud claims against companies in federal court.

Nvidia’s appeal targets a ruling by a lower court that allowed the 2018 class action to proceed, challenging whether the plaintiffs met the demanding criteria set by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) of 1995. Enacted to curb frivolous lawsuits, the PSLRA established stringent thresholds for investors to meet before bringing private securities fraud claims. Some of the justices appeared cautious about stepping into a matter that may be more about complex factual disputes than clear-cut legal questions.

Read more: Nvidia’s Acquisition of AI Startup Run.ai Faces EU Antitrust Review

Justice Elena Kagan, for instance, raised concerns about the court’s capacity to handle the intricate details of the case, according to Reuters. “It just seems to me that you’re asking us to engage in a kind of analysis that we are not very good at and weren’t expecting when we took this case,” Kagan remarked, addressing Nvidia’s attorney Neal Katyal.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also voiced apprehensions regarding Nvidia’s request for a more stringent standard. She argued that requiring plaintiffs to have complete evidence at the initial pleading stage would create an unfair hurdle, especially since critical information often surfaces later in litigation. “I guess my concern is that you appear to be requiring for plaintiffs to actually have the evidence in order to plead their case,” Jackson noted, reflecting on the burdens imposed by Nvidia’s proposed standard.

The case’s outcome could reshape securities fraud litigation, potentially limiting investor recourse against corporations while navigating complex financial disclosures. Both companies and investors are closely watching these proceedings, as any ruling could reverberate across industries, influencing how transparent companies must be about their exposure to volatile markets such as cryptocurrency.

A decision in the Nvidia case is expected to take several months, and along with the Facebook case, it may either reinforce or reconfigure the current standards governing securities fraud litigation in the U.S.

Source: Reuters