Opinion ID: 618220
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Pleading Standard Under Iqbal

Text: The first prong of the immunity analysis requires that a claim of violation of a constitutional right be stated. Air Sunshine's claims fail on this prong. For a complaint alleging a recognized Bivens claim to survive a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff must plead that each Government-official defendant, through the official's own individual actions, has violated the Constitution. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1948. The complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to `state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.' Id. at 1949 (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Id. This is not a probability requirement, but it does require more than a sheer possibility that a defendant acted unlawfully. Id. In assessing whether the Iqbal standard is met, a court will accept as true all of the allegations contained in [the] complaint. Id. However, this tenet does not apply to statements in the complaint that merely offer legal conclusions couched as facts or are threadbare or conclusory. Soto-Torres, 654 F.3d at 158. Similarly, a court does not accept as true allegations that while not stating ultimate legal conclusions, are nevertheless so threadbare or speculative that they fail to cross `the line between the conclusory and the factual.' Peñalbert-Rosa v. Fortuño-Burset, 631 F.3d 592, 595 (1st Cir.2011) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557 n. 5, 127 S.Ct. 1955).