# Section 929p

`kaal:entity:section-929p`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 3 claims that carry the concept tag `section-929p`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

3 claims across 1 works, 2011 to 2011.

**2011**

- [1765901-023](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-023) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- On its face Section 929P(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act addresses only the jurisdiction of the district courts and does not expand the geographic scope of the substantive provisions of U.S. securities law.
  > On its face, the language of Section 929P(b) does not expand the geographic scope of substantive regula- tory provisions of the U.S. Securities laws.
  Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901
- [1765901-024](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-024) [predictive/argued] -- There is a substantial likelihood that U.S. courts will read the Dodd-Frank Act as giving some extraterritorial effect to SEC and DOJ suits, so Morrison cannot be expected to survive intact in actions brought under Section 929P(b).
  > There is substantial likelihood that U.S. courts could find that Congress has provided for some extraterritorial effect for SEC and DOJ suits in the Dodd-Frank Act and that therefore Morrison cannot be upheld in its entirety in suits by the SEC or the DOJ under Section 929P(b).
  Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901
- [1765901-036](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-036) [design/argued] -- Because of the ambiguities in Morrison and Dodd-Frank and the consequences of a broad reading for persons and companies in European and other jurisdictions, Congress should clarify its intent in Section 929P(b) with respect to SEC and DOJ suits over securities transactions outside the United States.
  > Congress should also clarify its intent in Section 929P(b) with respect to SEC and DOJ suits over securities transac- tions outside the United States.
  Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/section-929p.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.