27 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 257,305 times 280 Legal Analyses
Holding for a complaint to survive Rule 12(b), it must "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face"
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 270,937 times 367 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept
901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988) Cited 16,172 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a cognizable gender discrimination claim could be brought by a female domestic violence victim where the victim alleged police denied protection and made misogynistic comments including that "he did not blame [the victim's] husband for hitting her, because of the way she was 'carrying on'"
U.S. v. Ritchie
342 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 3,755 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court may consider "certain materials—documents attached to the complaint, documents incorporated by reference in the complaint, or matters of judicial notice—without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment"
United States ex rel. Lee v. Corinthian Colls.
655 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 1,530 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that this Court "can affirm a 12(b) dismissal 'on any ground supported by the record, even if the district court did not rely on the ground.'" (quoting Livid Holdings, Ltd. v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 416 F.3d 940, 950 (9th Cir. 2005))
Molski v. M.J. Cable, Inc.
481 F.3d 724 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 1,154 times
Holding that the “client or customer” limitation of § 12182(b) does not apply to § 12182 or to § 12182(b)
Marder v. Lopez
450 F.3d 445 (9th Cir. 2006) Cited 1,035 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding courts may consider on a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) extrinsic documents if the complaint refers to the document; the document is central to the plaintiff's claim; and no party questions the authenticity of the [document proffered]”
Zukle v. Regents of the University of California
166 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 527 times
Holding that the anti-discrimination provision of § 504 requires the plaintiff to show that she is "otherwise qualified" for the position at issue
Munson v. Del Taco, Inc.
46 Cal.4th 661 (Cal. 2009) Cited 334 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff need not prove intentional discrimination to recover for an ADA violation under the Unruh Act
Arizona ex Rel. Goddard v. Harkins Amusement
603 F.3d 666 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 206 times
Rejecting similar reasoning in a Title III case; adding: "For example, a courthouse that was accessible only by steps could not avoid ADA liability by arguing that everyone--including the wheelchair bound--has equal access to the steps. And an office building could not avoid having to put Braille numbering on the buttons in its elevator by arguing that everyone--including the blind--has equal access to the written text."; explaining that, while other decisions "support the proposition that the content of a good or service need not be altered under the ADA, neither of those decisions turn on whether a place of public accommodation must provide an auxiliary aid or service that falls within the mandate of § 12182(b)."
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 351,086 times 937 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction
28 U.S.C. § 1367 Cited 62,785 times 78 Legal Analyses
Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"
Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 28,789 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."
Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose
Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 Cited 15,276 times 49 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"
Section 51 - Unruh Civil Rights Act
Cal. Civ. Code § 51 Cited 4,799 times 35 Legal Analyses
Incorporating ADA violations
Section 12182 - Prohibition of discrimination by public accommodations
42 U.S.C. § 12182 Cited 3,936 times 61 Legal Analyses
Explaining that public accommodations cannot "directly or through contractual or other arrangements, utilize standards or criteria or methods of administration" that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of disability."

Cristina Aguirre v. California School of Court Reporters (Cscr) - Riverside

27 Cited authorities

Holding for a complaint to survive Rule 12(b), it must "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face"

Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

Holding that a court may consider "certain materials—documents attached to the complaint, documents incorporated by reference in the complaint, or matters of judicial notice—without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment"

Holding that this Court "can affirm a 12(b) dismissal 'on any ground supported by the record, even if the district court did not rely on the ground.'" (quoting Livid Holdings, Ltd. v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 416 F.3d 940, 950 (9th Cir. 2005))

Holding that the “client or customer” limitation of § 12182(b) does not apply to § 12182 or to § 12182(b)

Holding courts may consider on a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) extrinsic documents if the complaint refers to the document; the document is central to the plaintiff's claim; and no party questions the authenticity of the [document proffered]”

Holding that the anti-discrimination provision of § 504 requires the plaintiff to show that she is "otherwise qualified" for the position at issue

Holding that a plaintiff need not prove intentional discrimination to recover for an ADA violation under the Unruh Act

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

Incorporating ADA violations

Explaining that public accommodations cannot "directly or through contractual or other arrangements, utilize standards or criteria or methods of administration" that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of disability."