
    RETIREMENT SYSTEMS OF ALABAMA and The Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Alabama, Respondents-Appellants, v. J.P. MORGAN CHASE & CO., J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Bank of America Corp., Banc of America Securities LLC, Citigroup Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., (f/k/a/ Salomon Smith Barney Inc.) and Arthur Andersen LLP, Applicants-Appellees.
    No. 04-2275.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Aug. 25, 2004.
    
      J. Michael Rediker, Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC, Birmingham, AL (William K. Slaughter, Thomas L. Krebs, Michael K.K. Choy, J. Vernon Patrick, Thomas T. Gallion III, Page A. Poerschke, Vincent J. Graffeo, Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC, Birmingham, AL; Leo, Kayser III, Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC, New York, NY; John C. Jeffries, Charlottesville, VA), for Respondent-Appellant Retirement Systems of Alabama, of counsel.
    Kevin Newsom, Solicitor General of the State of Alabama (Charles Campbell, Assistant Attorney General, Troy King, Attorney General of the State of Alabama, on the brief), Office of the Attorney General, Montgomery, AL, for Respondent-Appellant The Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Alabama, of counsel.
    Jay B. Kasner (Susan L. Saltzstein, Cyrus Amir-Mokri, Steven J. Kolleeny), Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY, for Applieants-Ap-pellees J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Bank of America Corp., and Banc of America Securities LLC, of counsel.
    Martin London (Bruce Birenboim, Brad S. Karp, Eric S. Goldstein, Joyce S. Huang), Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY, for Applicants-Appellees Citigroup Inc. and Citigroup Global Markets Inc., of counsel.
    Michael Moscato (Eliot Lauer), Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP, New York, NY, for Applicant-Appellee Arthur Andersen LLP, of counsel.
    PRESENT: JOSÉ A. CABRANES, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges
    
    
      
       Because the Honorable Chester J. Straub re-cused himself prior to oral argument, this case was decided by a two-judge panel pursuant to the applicable law.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

The judgment of the District Court is reversed. The District Court’s injunction is vacated. An opinion by the Court will be issued in due course. It is so ordered.  