Also known as: FRCP 12(b)(6) · Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) · Rule 12(b)(6) · 12(b)(6) motion · failure to state a claim
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A pretrial motion by which a defendant challenges the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's complaint. The court assumes the truth of well-pleaded factual allegations and draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor but disregards legal conclusions and labels. Dismissal follows when those facts fail to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.
The Bayview Neighborhood Association sued GreenWaste Services alleging toxic dumping near a wetland. Its complaint stated only that animals were disappearing and the water looked different, without any facts about discharges, tests, or pollutants. GreenWaste moved to dismiss before answering. The court granted the motion because the allegations supplied no factual content permitting a plausible inference of liability.
A patient sued Medtronic after a pacemaker lead allegedly caused injury. The complaint asserted state tort claims without addressing the device's federal regulatory approval. Medtronic moved to dismiss. The court examined whether the claims survived federal preemption analysis at the pleading stage.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Adam Clayton Powell sued the Speaker and other House officials after the House voted to exclude him from his seat. The complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief based on constitutional violations. Defendants moved to dismiss. The court assessed whether the allegations presented a justiciable controversy under the pleaded facts.
Paul sued a police chief after his name appeared on a flyer listing active shoplifters. The complaint claimed the listing damaged his reputation and employment prospects. The chief moved to dismiss. The court evaluated whether the pleaded facts stated a liberty or property interest sufficient to support relief.
A tenured teacher sued the school board after dismissal without a pre-termination hearing. The complaint alleged deprivation of a protected interest without due process. The board moved to dismiss. The court considered whether the facts alleged a cognizable constitutional claim.
Monroe sued Chicago police officers after an alleged unlawful search and seizure. The complaint sought damages directly under the Constitution. Defendants moved to dismiss. The court examined whether the pleaded facts supported an implied federal cause of action.
A defendant may raise failure to state a claim in a pre-answer motion or in the answer itself. The defense is preserved even if omitted from an initial motion and may be asserted later by motion for judgment on the pleadings or at trial.
Supporting sources
The court accepts well-pleaded factual allegations as true and draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor. It disregards legal conclusions and labels. Dismissal is proper only when the facts alleged do not state a plausible claim for relief.
Supporting sources
The motion must be converted to one for summary judgment. Both parties must receive a reasonable opportunity to present all material pertinent to that motion before the court rules.
Supporting sources
No. The complaint must contain enough factual content to make a plausible claim, not merely a theoretical possibility. Bare assertions of a course of dealing or conclusory labels are insufficient.
Supporting sources
…harms identified by petitioner in his brief before this Court is a subject of hot dispute, hardly amenable to dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Compare, e. g. , Brief for Petitioner 36-37 and Brief for David Robinson, Jr., as Amicus Curiae 23-28, on the one hand, with People v. Onofre , 51 N. Y. 2d 476, 489, 415 N. E. 2d 936,…