CV Sciences Inc (CVSI)

[ap17]

Interesting the Plaintiffs are moving to strike 18 of 19 exhibits submitted by defendant's in our motion to dismiss. I WONDER WHY? LOL
I highlighted in bold red for our reading enjoyment.

Citron's case will be flushed down the toilet soon, tic toc.

II. LEGAL ARGUMENT
A. Applicable Standards
In assessing securities fraud claims, “courts must consider the complaint in its entirety, as
well as other sources courts ordinarily examine when Ruling on Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss,
in particular [1] documents incorporated into the complaint by reference, and [2] matters of which
a court may take judicial notice.” Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308, 322
(2007).
A document “may be incorporated by reference into a complaint if [1] the plaintiff refers
extensively to the document or [2] the document forms the basis of the plaintiff’s claim.” United
States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2003). The incorporation by reference doctrine
“prevents plaintiffs from selecting only portions of documents that support their claims, while
omitting portions of those very documents that weaken—or doom—their claims.” Khoja v.
Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., 899 F.3d 988, 1002 (9th Cir. 2018); see also Parrino v. FHP, Inc.,
146 F.3d 699, 706 (9th Cir. 1988) (observing “the policy concern underlying the rule: Preventing
plaintiffs form surviving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion by deliberately omitting references to documents
upon which their claims are based.”).
Judicial notice under Rule 201 permits a court to notice an adjudicative fact if it is “not
subject to reasonable dispute.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). A fact is “not subject to reasonable dispute”
if it is “generally known” or “can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose
accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b)(1)-(2). Accordingly, “[a] court
may take judicial notice of ‘matters of public record’ without converting a motion to dismiss into a
motion for summary judgment.” Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001).
Case 2:18-cv-01602-JAD-BNW Document 46 Filed 05/17/19 Page 7 of 22


DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STRIKE – 3
CASE NO. 2:18-CV-01602-JAD-PAL
As set forth below, each of the exhibits submitted by Defendants is subject to the
incorporation by reference rule or judicial notice doctrine (or both) and therefore proper for
consideration on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.