Oseguera

MEMORANDUM ***

Plaintiff Israel Vega Oseguera appeals the dismissal, for failure to state a claim, of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit against Los Angeles Police Detective Dennis Winters and the City of Los Angeles. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because the Defendants’ motion should have been treated as a motion for summary judgment and the parties allowed to file all relevant additional material, we reverse. The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties, and are restated herein only as necessary.

*637 When a district court dismisses a claim pursuant to a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion, “we evaluate the complaint de novo to decide whether it states a claim upon which relief could be granted____” Gonzales v. Metro. Transp. Auth., 174 F.3d 1016 , 1018 (9th Cir.1999). All factual allegations set forth in the complaint “are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to [plaintiffs.” Epstein v. Wash. Energy Co., 83 F.3d 1136, 1140 (9th Cir.1996). A ruling on the appropriate statute of limitations is also reviewed de novo. Williamson v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 208 F.3d 1144, 1149 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 929, 121 S.Ct. 309 , 148…