After tossing the SPSS Inc. securities class action for the second time, Judge James B. Moran (N.D. Ill.) offered this candid comment/prediction: "The heightened pleading requirements of the PSLRA are not the usual stuff of federal pleading motions, which generally relate to the exceedingly relaxed pleading requirements of Rule 12(b)(6). Where to draw the line in light of PSLRA is a relatively new experience. We have no doubt that this dismissal will be appealed, and it may well be that the Court of Appeals will conclude that we raised the threshold too high. If it so concludes, then the action may proceed upon the present pleadings. If it agrees with this court that the PSLRA standard acts as a bar, we see no prejudice to plaintiffs in not permitting them to amend once again. As this and the earlier opinion in this case illustrate, the issues are very fact-, or more accurately, ‘allegation’ - intensive. We are confident that plaintiffs have given it their best shot in the second amended complaint, and we see no reason to repeat an analysis of yet another complaint."
You can read Davis v. SPSS, issued March 14, 2006, at 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10678.
Nugget: "Plaintiffs' second amended complaint differs very little from plaintiff's first amended complaint. With the exception of adding a plaintiff to remedy their previous standing problem, plaintiffs have not cured any of the deficiencies we identified in our thorough response to plaintiff's first amended complaint."