Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): As to Defendant’s Shifrin’s Motion for Summary Judgment, in which he raises the same or similar arguments as those made in his earlier motion but attaches extraneous information and discusses material derived through discovery, the Court reviews that motion under the standard regarding entry of summary judgment. When reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), the Court accepts as true the well-pled factual allegations and draws all reasonable inferences in favor of Plaintiffs. Shaw v. Valdez, 819 F.2d 965, 968 (10th Cir.1987). The Court considers whether the Complaint contains allegations that support a plausible legal claim for relief. Alvarado, 493 F.3d at 1215 n. 2; see also Bell Atl. Corp. v.Twombly, — U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1974, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (<HOLDING>). Summary judgment is proper when the record 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that dismissal pursuant to rule 12b6 is appropriate if the plaintiff is unable to articulate enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face (B) recognizing that to survive dismissal a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter accepted as true to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face internal quotation marks omitted (C) holding that a complaint must contain only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face (D) holding that a complaint must plead enough facts to raise a right to relief above the speculative level and state a plausible claim (E) holding that while the complaint need not contain detailed factual allegations it must contain more than a formulaic recitation of the elements of a claim and must state a claim that is plausible on its face
Output (English): holding that dismissal pursuant to rule 12b6 is appropriate if the plaintiff is unable to articulate enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face