Lauran
Lauran v. United States Forest Service
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
The district court dismissed Plaintiffs’ complaint with prejudice because Plaintiffs failed to state claims upon which relief could be granted, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), and amendment would be futile. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 1 Each of plaintiffs’ nine arguments concerning the validity of the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program (“RFDP”), 16 U.S.C. § 460Z-6a, will be addressed in turn.
I. Standard of Review
We review de novo a district court’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal for failure to state a claim. See Decker v. Advantage Fund, Ltd., 362 F.3d 593, 595-96 (9th Cir.2004). We review a district court’s denial of leave to amend de novo. See Smith v. Pacific Props. & Dev. Corp., 358 F.3d 1097 , 1100 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 106 , 160 L.Ed.2d 116 (2004). Dismissal without leave to amend is improper unless it is clear that the complaint could not be saved by any amendment. See Thinket Ink Info. Res., Inc. v. Sun Microsystems, Inc., 368 F.3d 1053, 1061 (9th Cir.2004).
A. Plaintiffs had actual and timely notice of the Enterprise Project’s Adventure Pass requirement