Williams v. MCIMetro Access Transmission Services Inc.

MEMORANDUM

The parties are familiar with the facts of the case and we do not repeat them here. Plaintiff-Appellant April-Lee Williams (“Williams”) appeals a district court’s oral order granting Defendant-Appellee MCIMetro Access Transmission Services, Inc.’s (“MCI’s”) motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6). The district court ruled Williams failed to state a cognizable legal theory-under Revised Code of Washington (“RCW”) 80.36.400 and alternatively, RCW 80.36.400 was preempted by 47 U.S.C. § 227 , the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. We affirm on the first ground and accordingly decline to reach the alternative basis for dismissal.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review a dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) de novo. Madison v. Graham, 316 F.3d 867, 869 (9th Cir.2002). A Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal may be based on either the “lack of a cognizable legal theory” or “the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.” Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1990). We conclude the district court did not err in dismissing Williams’ claim for failure to…