International Norcent Technology v. Koninklijke Philips Electronics

MEMORANDUM **

*572 We review de novo the district court’s order dismissing Nor cent’s complaint for failure to state a claim, taking the facts alleged in the complaint as true and construing them in a light favorable to plaintiff. Les Shockley Racing, Inc. v. Nat’l Hot Rod Ass’n, 884 F.2d 504, 507 (9th Cir.1989). Norcent did not plead facts with adequate specificity to state a claim. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 , 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007); Kendall v. Visa U.S.A., Inc., 518 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir.2008).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid *572 ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.