Rachel Neumann

Neumann photo.jpg

Rachel Neumann

$0.00

2019-2020 Senior Editor, 2018-19 Staff Editor, 2017-18 Contributor

Rachel is a third-year law student at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. With nearly two decades of experience in corporate communications and marketing, her interests include corporate transactions and intellectual property law. Prior to law school, Rachel worked for both nonprofits and publicly held corporations, as well as private equity- and venture-backed companies and startups in industries including hospitality, healthcare, homebuilding, and digital music. She was involved from the ground level at three different startups. She also is an active member of her community, serving on the board of directors for the Lowry Redevelopment Authority and Cancer League of Colorado.

At DU Law, Rachel is the president of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies and is a member of the Business Law Society. A native of Texas, Rachel has lived in Colorado since 2000, yet she retains her love for Tex-Mex, Texas country music, and Longhorn football (just about everything except for the humidity). She and her husband are also the parents of three school-aged children.

Connect with Rachel on LinkedIn.

Add To Cart
Student and Faculty Blog of University of Denver Sturm College of Law
Moore v. Payson Petroleum Grayson: Investors in 3-Well Program Denied Transfer of Venue

In Moore v. Payson Petroleum Grayson, LLC, No. 3:17-CV-1436-M-BH, 2018 BL 21203 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 23, 2018), the court denied a motion to transfer venue filed by seven Payson Petroleum Grayson, LLC (“Payson”) investors (“Plaintiffs”), from the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division (“Dallas Division”), to the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division (“Sherman Division”). In the class action, Plaintiffs’ alleged Payson and twelve other defendants (collectively “Defendants”) violated the Texas Securities Act. In denying the motion to transfer, the court reasoned both private and public interest factors, as well as the interest of justice, did not warrant transfer.

No-Action Letter Granted for Apple Allowing Exclusion of Proposal Connecting Sustainability and Diversity Metrics with Executive Compensation

In Apple Inc., 2017 BL 452782 (Dec. 15, 2017), Apple Inc. (“Apple”) asked the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to permit the omission of a proposal submitted by Zevin Asset Management, LLC, on behalf of Eli Plenk (“Shareholders”) that would integrate sustainability and diversity metrics with the performance measures of Apple’s executive compensation plans. The SEC issued the requested no action letter allowing for the exclusion of the proposal from Apple’s proxy statement under Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(ii).

Judge Tosses Fraud Suit Against Seattle Genetics for Lack of Scienter

In Patel v. Seattle Genetics, Inc., No. C17-41RSM, 2017 BL 373924 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 18, 2017), the court granted biopharma company Seattle Genetics’ and three of its executives’ (collectively “Defendants”) motion to dismiss Carl Johnson’s, the lead plaintiff of an investor group (collectively “Plaintiffs”), Consolidated Amended Complaint (“CAC”) for failure to state a claim. Although Plaintiffs satisfied the misrepresentation element of the 10b claim in their complaint, the court held they failed to demonstrate scienter or underlying securities fraud by Defendants, and therefore dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims under SEC Rule 10b-5 and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act.