Bettencourt

(PS) Robinson v. Bettencourt

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 11, 20252:24-cv-00760California1,132 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROSE A. ROBINSON, Case No. 2:24-cv-0760-DC-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENNIS BETTENCOURT, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Rose Robinson has filed an amended complaint against Dennis Bettencourt, Costal Capital, and Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. Her amended complaint, however, fails to state a claim. I will dismiss her complaint and give her a final opportunity to file an amended complaint that addresses the defects noted herein. Screening and Pleading Requirements A complaint must contain a short and plain statement that plaintiff is entitled to relief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), and provide “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face,” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The plausibility standard does not require detailed allegations, but legal conclusions do not suffice. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). If the allegations “do not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.