On September 20th, the district court entered summary judgment in favor of defendants on SEC's insider trading claims under both the classical and misappropriation theories of insider trading. Because the SEC failed to show that a fiduciary duty or confidentiality agreement existed between a potential lender and the issuer, defendant, an employee of the lender, could not have breached a fiduciary duty owed to the issuer as a temporary insider by allegedly passing on insider information. The SEC also failed to show the scienter required under the misappropriation theory. SEC v. Obus.