United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER GRANTING DEERPOINT GROUP, INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS ACQUA CONCEPTS, INC.'S COUNTERCLAIM AND VACATING DECEMBER 17, 2014 HEARING
(ECF Nos. 14, 15, 16, 25, 26) FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
Currently before the Court is Deerpoint Group, Inc.'s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The Court, having reviewed the record, finds this matter suitable for decision without oral argument. See Local Rule 230(g). Accordingly, the hearing set on December 17, 2014 will be vacated and the parties will not be required to appear at that time.
Plaintiff Deerpoint Group, Inc. ("Deerpoint") filed the complaint in this action on September 25, 2014, against Defendants Acqua Concepts, Inc. ("Acqua"), Andres Barrera, and Eduardo Erenas alleging patent infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, and breach of confidentiality agreements. On October 25, 2014, Acqua filed a counterclaim against Deerpoint seeking declaratory relief finding the patents to be invalid and non-infringement.
On November 14, 2014, Deerpoint filed a notice of motion to dismiss and memorandum under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim. On November 26, 2014, the parties consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge. Acqua filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on December 12, 2014, and Deerpoint filed a reply on December 9, 2014.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), a party may file a motion to dismiss on the grounds that a complaint "fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). "[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require detailed factual allegations, ' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully harmed-me accusation." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). In assessing the sufficiency of a complaint, all well-pleaded factual allegations must be accepted as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678-79. However, "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Id. at 678.
In deciding whether a complaint states a claim, the Ninth Circuit has found that two principles apply. First, to be entitled to the presumption of truth the allegations in the complaint "may not simply recite the elements of a cause of action, but must contain sufficient allegations of underlying facts to give fair notice and to enable the opposing party to defend itself effectively." Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, 1216 (9th Cir. 2011). Second, so that it is not unfair to require the defendant to be subjected to the expenses associated with discovery and continued litigation, the factual allegations of the complaint, which are taken as true, must plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief. Starr, 652 F.3d at 1216.
Deerpoint moves to dismiss Acqua's counterclaim contending that it does not contain sufficient factual detail to meet the pleading requirements of Rule 8. Acqua counters that it need not meet the pleading standard established by Twombly. Acqua contends that the cases cited by Deerpoint concern actions ...