SAC contained sufficient allegations to 12 support a plausible § 523(a)(2)(A) claim as to the investments 13 in the coins venture and the film venture. As a result, the SAC 14 contained sufficient allegations to state a plausible 15 § 523(a)(3)(B) claim based on § 523(a)(2)(A). Thus, dismissal 16 of the § 523(a)(3)(B) claim in that respect was erroneous, and 17 we REVERSE that aspect of the dismissal order. 18 CONCLUSION 19 Based on the foregoing, We AFFIRM the bankruptcy court on 20 its dismissal of the § 523(a)(2)(B) and (a)(6) claims. But, we 21 AFFIRM in part and REVERSE in part on its dismissal of the 22 § 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)(3)(B) claims. 26