Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-03347/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-03347-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

KRISTOPHER A. SCHWARTZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

ART COOK, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-03347-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

On January 7, 2016, the Court heard oral argument on Defendant Bankers Trust Company 

of South Dakota’s (“Bankers Trust” or “Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss. ECF 35. The Court has 

considered the parties’ briefing and oral argument. For the reasons stated on the record and below, 

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED with leave to amend. 

Plaintiff fails to specify the precise actions that Bankers Trust, rather than the other 

defendants, took in his allegations. See, e.g., Compl., ¶¶ 67-70. While a complaint need not 

contain detailed factual allegations, it “must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 

‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) 

(quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when 

it “allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct 

alleged.” Id. Plaintiff’s complaint fails this standard1because the allegations of wrongdoing apply 

to “[a]ll of the Defendants—including Buckles-Smith, the Individual Defendants, [Bankers Trust]

and John Doe Defendants.” Compl. ¶ 69. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss 

 

1

The parties dispute whether the pleading standard of Rule 9(b) applies. Because the Court finds

that the allegations do not meet the standards set forth in Twombly and Iqbal, it does not reach that 

issue.

Case 5:15-cv-03347-BLF Document 61 Filed 01/07/16 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall file his amended complaint on or before February 8, 2016.

At the hearing, Plaintiff noted that access to the Service Agreement would aid him in 

making allegations with the requisite specificity. Bankers Trust objects to disclosing the 

agreement due to confidentiality concerns. The Court DIRECTS the parties to meet and confer on 

this issue, including the possibility of entering into a protective order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 7, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-03347-BLF Document 61 Filed 01/07/16 Page 2 of 2