Opinion ID: 819233
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: We review a dismissal under Rule 12 (b)(6) de novo. Gray v. Evercore Restructuring L.L.C., 544 F.3d 320, 324 (1st Cir. 2008). To do so, we first discard bald assertions and conclusory allegations. Ocasio-Hernández v. Fortuño-Burset, 640 F.3d 1, 12 (1st Cir. 2011). Then we view the well-pleaded facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, drawing all reasonable inferences in its favor. Gray, 544 F.3d at 324. In performing this analysis, we cannot dismiss a complaint [that] satisfies Rule 8(a)(2)'s requirement of a 'short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entailed to relief.' OcasioHernández, 640 F.3d at 11 (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)). In other words, a complaint passes muster at the pleading stage if we find that it contains enough detail to provide a defendant with 'fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which -14- it rests.' Id. at 12 (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). In contrast, we review for abuse of discretion denials of motions for leave to amend the pleadings, and will affirm if any adequate reason for the denial is apparent from the record. O'Connell v. Hyatt Hotels of P.R., 357 F.3d 152, 154 (1st Cir. 2004).