Opinion ID: 2451
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Sufficient Pleading under Iqbal

Text: More generally, we think the district court's extended recitation of the allegations in the complaint makes clear that the facts of Arar's mistreatment while within the United Statesincluding the alleged denial of his access to courts and counsel and his alleged mistreatment while in federal detention in the United Stateswere pleaded meticulously and in copious detail. The assertion of relevant places, times, and eventsand names when knownis lengthy and specific. Even measured in light of Supreme Court case law post-dating the district court's dismissal of the fourth claim, which instituted a more stringent standard of review for pleadings, the complaint here passes muster. It does not offer[] `labels and conclusions' or `a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.' Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). Nor does it tender[] `naked assertion[s]' devoid of `further factual enhancement.' Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557, 127 S.Ct. 1955). Its allegations of a constitutional violation are `plausible on [their] face.' Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955). And, as we have explained, Arar has pled factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant[s][are] liable for the misconduct alleged. Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556, 127 S.Ct. 1955). We would therefore vacate the district court's dismissal of the Fourth Claim for Relief.