Epstein Secrets

ion that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. The United States Supreme Court very recently made clear in Ashcroft v. labal, No. 07-1015 (U.S. May 18, EFTA00222862 Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2009 Page 2 of 11 Jane Doe II

Motion To Dismiss, dated May 22, 2009, MOLT Accordingly, Defendant states: I. Legal Standard (pp. 1-2 of Plaintiff's MOLI Plaintiff's reliance on Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957), as the Rule 12(b)(6) pleading standard is misplaced. As discussed in Defendant's motion to dismiss, (pp. 16 — 17), the

(a)(2) generally sets the benchmark for determining whether a complaint's allegations are sufficient to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. See lqbal v. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. 662, 677-678, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009) ("Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2), a pleading must contain a

t Rule l3(a)(2) requires that the pleading "'give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests" (quoting Conley v. Gibson. 355 U.S. 41. 47. 78 S. Ct. 99.2 L. Ed. 2d 80 (1957))). B. The Plaintiffs claims against BIC are properly asserted in tort. BIC argues that all cl

ion that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. The United States Supreme Court very recently made clear in Ashcroft v. lubal No. 07-1015 (U.S. May 18, EFTA00175268 Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2009 Page 3 of 11 Jane Doe II

ion To Dismiss, dated May 22, 2009, ("MOL"). Accordingly, Defendant states: I. Legal Standard (pp. 1-2 of Plaintiff's MOLI Plaintiff's reliance on Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957), as the Rule 12(b)(6) pleading standard is misplaced. As discussed in Defendant's motion to dismiss, (pp. 16 - 17), the