This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
6
alleged in the complaint and the existence of any f act that can
be proved, consistent with the complaint‘s allegati ons.‖ E.
Shore Mkts., Inc. v. J.D. Assocs. Ltd. P‘ship , 213 F.3d 175, 180
(4th Cir. 2000). While a district court must const rue the facts
in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, it is not
obligated to accept a complaint‘s legal conclusions. See Schatz
v. Rosenberg, 943 F.2d 485, 489 (4th Cir. 1991).
Construing the factual allegations in plaintiff‘s f avor, a
complaint must be dismissed if it does not allege ―enough facts
to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.‖ Bell
Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); ac cord
Giarratano v. Johnson, 521 F.3d 298, 302 (4th Cir. 2008). To
satisfy such plausibility standard a plaintiff‘s ―[ f]actual
allegations must be enough to raise a right to reli ef above the
speculative level on the assumption that all the al legations in
the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact).‖ Twombly,
550 U.S. at 555 (internal citation omitted). ―Thre adbare
recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supp orted by mere
conclusory statements, do not suffice‖ to survive a motion to
dismiss. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009); see
Francis v. Giacomelli, 588 F.3d 186, 193 (4th Cir. 2009)
(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 ) (―‗[N]aked assertions‘ of
wrongdoing necessitate some ‗factual enhancement‘ w ithin the Jump to an indexed page (39 of 39)