In Re China Automotive Systems, Inc., Derivative Litigation, Cons. C.A. No. 7145-VCN (Del. Ch., Aug. 30, 2013)

This decision provides an excellent review of the settled Delaware law on the issue of pre-suit demand requirements and the prerequisites for satisfying demand futility, especially in connection with a Caremark claim, based on the well-worn Aronson and Rales criteria.  The court also provides a reminder at footnote 104 that plaintiffs are still expected to use § 220, demands for books and records prior to filing a derivative suit, notwithstanding the view of some plaintiffs that the use of § 220 is itself often futile.