The Supreme Court's definition of materiality is:
"An omitted fact is material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable shareholder would consider it important in deciding how to vote. … Put another way, there must be a substantial likelihood that the disclosure of the omitted fact would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the "total mix" of information made available."
Discuss what is different between the Supreme Court’s description of materiality and the FASB’s second definition (CON8). You can point to differences in specific words, and explain how those words change the interpretation.