The opinion of the court was delivered by: Manuel R. Real United States District Judge
ORDER GRANTING ALTA-DENA CERTIFIED DAIRY, LLC'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE Date: July 2, 2012 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Courtroom of the Hon. Manuel L. Real Courtroom 8 - 2nd Floor
Defendant Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC's ("Alta-Dena") Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint came on for hearing on July 2, 2012. Having considered the papers submitted by the parties as well as oral argument, and for good cause shown, the Court hereby GRANTS Alta-Dena's motion and DISMISSES Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint WITH PREJUDICE.
Dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is proper only when a complaint exhibits either a "lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory." Balisteri v. Pacifica Police Dept., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988) (citation omitted). Under the pleading standards of Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 444 (2007) and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), a plaintiff must allege enough facts to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). The Court will not accept "threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action supported by mere conclusory statements . . . ." Id. at 678 (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).
It is beyond question that Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint is nothing more than "threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action supported by mere conclusory statements." Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Plaintiffs concede this point in their non-opposition. However, Plaintiffs request that dismissal be granted with leave to amend.
Generally, leave to amend shall be freely given when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Such request for leave should be granted with "extreme liberality." Owens v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712 (9th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). When contemplating granting a motion to dismiss, a district court should provide leave unless it is "clear . . . that the complaint could not be saved by any amendment." Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). To assess a motion for leave to amend, the Court considers "the presence of any of four factors: bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the opposing party, and/or futility." Owens, 244 F.3d at 712 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Alta-Dena does not argue for bad faith, undue delay, or prejudice. Instead, Alta-Dena suggests that the amendment would be futile.
Although Plaintiffs did state in their non-opposition that any defect in their First Amended Complaint "can be easily cured and resolved via an amended complaint," Pls.' Non.-Opp. at 2, they failed to proffer any facts supporting their request for leave to amend and failed to submit a proposed amended complaint. C.D. Cal. L.R. 15-1; see also Gardner v. Martino, 563 F.3d 981, 991 (9th Cir. 2009). Considering the circumstances of this matter, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The Court hereby DISMISSES Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint WITH PREJUDICE.
Respectfully submitted, STEVEN G. SKLAVER KALPANA SRINIVASAN AMANDA BONN SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. By: /s/ Amanda Bonn Amanda Bonn Attorneys for Defendant Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...