Copelan

Copelan v. Infinity Insurance Co.

Good Law
192 F. Supp. 3d 1063·2016 WL 3398408·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82847
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 14, 2016CASE NO. CV 16-1355-RCalifornia1,684 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Real, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Before the Court are Defendant Infinity Insurance Company’s (“Infinity”) Motion to Dismiss the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Causes of Action in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (Dkt. No. 20) and Defendant Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company’s (“Liberty”) Motion to Dismiss the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action in the FAC (Dkt. No. 17), which were filed on June 6, 2016. These matters were taken under submission on June 1, 2016.

On a motion to dismiss, the trial court takes all well-pleaded facts in the complaint to be true and determines whether, based upon those facts, the complaint states a claim upon which relief may be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). See Alperin v. Vatican Bank, 410 F.3d 532, 541 (9th Cir.2005). To state a claim, the complaint must contain factual assertions which make the claimed relief not merely possible, but “plausible.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 663 , 129 S.Ct. 1937 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 , 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007). Although factual assertions are taken as true, the court does not accept legal conclusions…

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.