BURLEY v. ONEWEST BANK, FSB, 2:14-1349 WBS EFB. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150210722
Visitors: 24
Filed: Feb. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. On December 3, 2014, the court dismissed plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint ("FAC") with limited leave to amend. Plaintiffs have now filed a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC"). (Docket No. 32), which defendants move to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Docket No. 35.) Because the SAC cures, for purposes of surviving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the deficiencies in the FA
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. On December 3, 2014, the court dismissed plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint ("FAC") with limited leave to amend. Plaintiffs have now filed a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC"). (Docket No. 32), which defendants move to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Docket No. 35.) Because the SAC cures, for purposes of surviving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the deficiencies in the FAC..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
On December 3, 2014, the court dismissed plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint ("FAC") with limited leave to amend. Plaintiffs have now filed a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC"). (Docket No. 32), which defendants move to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Docket No. 35.) Because the SAC cures, for purposes of surviving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the deficiencies in the FAC noted in the court's previous Order, defendants' motion to dismiss the SAC is DENIED. The court expresses no opinion as to whether plaintiffs' allegations are sufficient to survive a Motion for Summary Judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
