IN RE N2K INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 202 F.3d 81 (2nd Cir. 2000)
WILLIAM L. MANNS, JEAN MORRISON, PAUL S. MARANTZ, AND MARK TALBERT, APPELLANTS, V. LAURENCE L. ROSEN, ROBERT DAVID GRUSIN, JAMES E. COANE, BRUCE JOHNSON, ROBERT C. HARRIS, JR., SUSANNE HARRISON, N2K, INC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES, PAINEWEBBER, ALLEN CO., BEAR STEARNS COMPANY, INCORPORATED, CONSOLIDATED-DEFENDANTS, AND JONATHAN V. DIAMOND, DEFENDANT.
Nos. 99-7745, 1045.United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.Argued January 14, 2000.
Decided: February 7, 2000.
Appeal from dismissal of plaintiffs’ complaint, with prejudice, by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Harold Baer Jr., Judge).
I. STEPHEN RABIN, New York, N.Y., (Jonathan M. Plasse, Catherine A. Murphy, Goodkind, Labaton, Rudoff Sucharow, New York, N.Y., on the brief), for Appellants.
SAUL P. MORGENSTERN, New York, N.Y. (Richard W. Reinthaler, John J. Blood, Dewey Ballantine LLP, New York, N.Y., on the brief), for Appellees.
Before: SOTOMAYOR and NEWMAN, Circuit Judges, and GOLDBERG,[*] Judge.
 Plaintiffs-appellants (“plaintiffs”) brought a class action lawsuit against N2K, Inc., an on-line music entertainment company that uses the Internet to sell, market, and promote music and other merchandise. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants-appellees (“defendants”) violated Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77k and 77o (1994), by disseminating materially false and misleading offering materials in connection with a secondary offering of N2K common stock. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that defendants had a duty, but knowingly failed, to disclose the 1998 first quarter results of N2K’s operations in the prospectus. Defendants moved pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The District Court granted defendants’ motion and dismissed the complaint with prejudice. See In re N2K Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 98CIV. 3304(HB), ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (S.D.N.Y. 1999). We affirm on the opinion of Judge Baer.