Hardage v. State of Oklahoma, et al.,

Filing 117

ORDER by District Judge James H. Payne: granting 104 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint of Defendants Hagen, Jenkins, Hunter and Loosli (cjt, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
TERRY HARDAGE,

Plaintiff,
vs.

No. CIV-11-295-JHP

THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, et al.,

Defendants.
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second
Amended Complaint (Dkt.# 104). In order to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above
the speculative level, on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true even if
doubtful in fact. Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007). Yet the Court
need not accept as true legal conclusions from the complaint or “‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of
‘further factual enhancement.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ____ U.S. ____ , 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009) (quoting
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
at 557). The Court, after careful review of the pleadings, and based upon the reasons as more fully
set forth in Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, finds that Plaintiff has failed to meet this standard and
for the further reasons as set forth in Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss said motion (Dkt # 104) is
GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of July, 2012.