Kevin Doan v. Nirmal Singh

Good Law
617 F. App'x 684
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 12, 201513-16980California1,059 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs Kevin and Pauline Doan filed a complaint in the Eastern District of California alleging a RICO claim and various state law claims. Plaintiffs’ claims related to failed gas station development investments in companies controlled by or associated with the individual Defendants. Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s order dismissing their complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an order denying Plaintiffs further leave to amend their first amended complaint. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

“We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).” Odom v. Microsoft Corp., 486 F.3d 541, 545 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc). We accept as true all factual allegations in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party. Retail Prop. Trust v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., 768 F.3d 938, 945 (9th Cir.2014). A complaint need not state “detailed factual allegations,” but it must contain sufficient factual matter to “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”…

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.