Team Enterprises, LLC v. Western Investment Real Estate Trust

Good Law
446 F. App'x 23
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 26, 201110-16486California615 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Team Enterprises, LLC (“Team”) appeals from the district court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) to Multimatic Corporation (“Multimatic”). As the facts are known to the parties, we repeat them here only as necessary.

Team argues that Multimatic is liable as an “arranger” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”). See 42 U.S.C. § 9607 (a)(8). Accepting Team’s factual allegations as true, Team has failed to “ ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ ” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 , 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 , 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). Specifically, Team has failed to allege facts showing that Multimatic sold Team the Solo Plus dry cleaning machine (“Solo Plus”) for the purpose of disposing of perchlorethylene or that Multimatic exercised control over the disposal process. See Team Enters., LLC v. W. Inv. Real Estate Trust, 647 F.3d 901 (9th Cir.2011); see also Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. United States, 556 U.S. 599 , 129 S.Ct. 1870, 1880 , 173 L.Ed.2d…

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.