PLACE v. RUSSELL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 4:17 CV 399 RWS. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri
Number: infdco20170414c42
Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 13, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 13, 2017
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RODNEY W. SIPPEL , District Judge . Having reviewed defendants' motion to dismiss in light of the relevant standards 1 , it will be denied as plaintiff has pleaded sufficient allegations which, if proven, would entitle him and other members of a purported collective action to relief. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [23] is denied. This case will be set for a Rule 16 conference by separate Order. FootNotes 1. The purpose of a
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RODNEY W. SIPPEL , District Judge . Having reviewed defendants' motion to dismiss in light of the relevant standards 1 , it will be denied as plaintiff has pleaded sufficient allegations which, if proven, would entitle him and other members of a purported collective action to relief. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [23] is denied. This case will be set for a Rule 16 conference by separate Order. FootNotes 1. The purpose of a m..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
RODNEY W. SIPPEL, District Judge.
Having reviewed defendants' motion to dismiss in light of the relevant standards1, it will be denied as plaintiff has pleaded sufficient allegations which, if proven, would entitle him and other members of a purported collective action to relief. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [23] is denied.
This case will be set for a Rule 16 conference by separate Order.
FootNotes
1. The purpose of a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(6) is to test the legal sufficiency of the complaint. When considering a 12(b)(6) motion, the court assumes the factual allegations of a complaint are true and construes them in favor of the plaintiff. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 326-27 (1989). To survive dismissal, a complaint must contain "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); accord Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009). The issue in considering such a motion is not whether the plaintiff will ultimately prevail, but whether the plaintiff is entitled to present evidence in support of the claim. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327.
Source: Leagle
