Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01585/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01585-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Rebecca Carrasco, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan 

Society, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-14-01585-PHX-DGC

ORDER 

Defendant The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society has filed a motion 

to dismiss. Doc. 4. The Court will deny the motion. 

Defendant’s motion does not cite a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure upon which 

dismissal could be granted. Instead of relying on Rule 12(b), Defendant argues that 

Plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed because she agreed to binding arbitration. 

Doc. 4 at 2. In support, Defendant cites facts outside of the pleadings, as does Plaintiff’s 

response. The Court will not consider these facts. See Arpin v. Santa Clara Valley 

Transp. Agency, 261 F.3d 912, 925 (9th Cir. 2001) (refusing to consider matters outside 

the pleadings in deciding motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint). With the extrapleading facts disregarded, the Court finds no basis in the motion for dismissing 

Plaintiff’s claim. 1 

 

1

 Plaintiff asserts that the Court should treat Defendant’s motion as one for 

summary judgment because the Court has been asked to consider matters outside the 

pleading. Doc. 5 at 1. But summary judgment is a merits determination and Defendant’s 

argument does not address the merits of Plaintiff’s complaint. The Court therefore will not convert Defendant’s motion to one for summary judgment. 

Case 2:14-cv-01585-DGC Document 9 Filed 08/18/14 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

The Court will not construe Defendant’s motion as a motion to compel arbitration 

because the motion does not seek that relief. 

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 4) is denied. 

Dated this 18th day of August, 2014. 

Case 2:14-cv-01585-DGC Document 9 Filed 08/18/14 Page 2 of 2