Docket last updated: 02/23/2017 11:59 PM EST
Friday, February 17, 2017
39 order Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Fri 1:03 PM
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered granting35 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim without prejudice. Plaintiffs' Complaint, although numbering 233 paragraphs, offers no factual allegations to supports its various legal claims and conclusions, and fails even the liberal pleading standard of Rule 8 at its most forgiving. In the "Factual Allegation" section of the Complaint, plaintiffs aver, upon information and belief throughout, that the various defendants "engaged in a business transaction" with plaintiffs (Compl. 13-24); that defendants "entered into an agreement" with plaintiffs (Compl. 24-36); that plaintiffs "acted in a commercially reasonable manner" (Compl. 36-48); and that defendants "caused irreparable harm and economic loss" to plaintiffs (Compl. 49-60). Plaintiffs' seven legal claims offer no further clarification as to what defendants are supposed to have done to harm plaintiffs. By way of example, in Count I (slander per se), plaintiffs allege that the various defendants "maliciously injured [plaintiffs] and [their] good name, reputation and business when engaging in slander per se," and that they "made false statement in full knowledge that they were untrue or in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity, and for the purpose of injuring [plaintiffs and their] good name, reputation, and business." (Compl. 65-85). Plaintiffs do not identify, however, what statements defendants are supposed to have made, to whom, why those statements were false, and how plaintiffs were injured by those statements. The court also notes the oddity that the entire Complaint, despite being supported by a verification, is alleged "upon information and belief," including allegations that should be well within plaintiffs' own knowledge (such whether they entered into a business transaction and/or agreement with defendants). Rather than requiring plaintiffs to oppose defendants' motion to dismiss the conspicuously deficient Complaint, the court will allow plaintiffs an opportunity to amend the Complaint no later than February 27, 2017. (RGS, int2)
