United States v. Adventist Health System/West

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Case No. 20-cv-06458-VC ex rel. MARY JAMES,

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO

DISMISS

v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 36,

ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM/WEST,

et al., Defendants.

The motions to dismiss are granted. The complaint is largely incomprehensible—almost gibberish in many places. That alone might be a reason to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. But it has several other problems. First, James fails to plead her fraud claims with particularity. Rule 9(b) requires a plaintiff to “state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake,” including “the who, what, when, where, and how of the misconduct charged.” Ebeid ex rel. U.S. v. Lungwitz, 616 F.3d 993, 998 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Vess v. Ciba–Geigy Corp. USA, 317 F.3d 1097, 1106 (9th Cir. 2003)). James’ complaint does not come close to clearing that bar. The allegations are entirely conclusory. E.g., Amended Complaint ¶ 46; see also Lungwitz, 616 F.3d at 1000. And many are simply irrelevant. E.g., Amended Complaint ¶ ¶ 61–63, 66.1 James’ complaint is deficient for another reason: It…