evaluating Judge Scola's 12(b)(6) dismissal of a Sherman Act complaint involving duty-free shops in airports.
Bring the Iqbal:
Rule 8(a) provides that a plaintiff’s pleading “must contain . . . a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” The Supreme Court has further instructed that the plaintiff must submit “more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). In order “[t]o survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). This “plausibility standard is met only where the facts alleged enable ‘the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.’” Simpson v. Sanderson Farms, Inc., 744 F.3d 702, 708 (11th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678). “Where a complaint pleads facts that are ‘merely consistent with’ a defendant’s liability, it ‘stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of ‘entitlement to relief.’” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Although “[a] plaintiff need not plead ‘detailed factual allegations[,] . . . a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do,’” and the plaintiff must offer in support of its claim “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘raise a right to relief above the speculative level.’” Simpson, 744 F.3d at 708 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).Too bad so sad, nondescript anonymous duty-free shops!
We measure each claim against this standard.