Opinion ID: 751831
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Evidence Submitted by Merisel

Text: 27 In our review of the dismissal, Merisel urges us to consider some of the documentary evidence it submitted to the district court, including transcripts of the conference calls, declarations, and a faxed copy of internal projections. Merisel contends that these documents show that the complaint's allegations that Merisel projected earnings during its conference calls with analysts and faxed internal projections to an analyst were outright falsehoods. The evidence can be considered in reviewing the dismissal, argues Merisel, because the documents are referred to or referenced by the complaint. 28 In reviewing the district court's dismissal of the complaint we consider only the contents of the complaint, taking as true all the allegations of material fact. Warshaw v. Xoma Corp., 74 F.3d 955, 957 (9th Cir.1996). In ruling on a motion to dismiss, a district court generally may not consider any material beyond the pleadings. Branch v. Tunnell, 14 F.3d 449, 453 (9th Cir.1994). 29 However, material which is properly submitted as part of the complaint may be considered on a motion to dismiss.... 30 [A] document is not outside the complaint if the complaint specifically refers to the document and if its authenticity is not questioned.... [W]hen [the] plaintiff fails to introduce a pertinent document as part of his pleading, [the] defendant may introduce the exhibit as part of his motion attacking the pleading.... [D]ocuments whose contents are alleged in a complaint and whose authenticity no party questions, but which are not physically attached to the pleading, may be considered in ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. 31 Id. at 453-54 (quotations & citations omitted). Thus, for example, a court ruling on a motion to dismiss may consider the full texts of documents which the complaint quotes only in part. Fecht v. The Price Co., 70 F.3d 1078, 1080 n. 1 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1136, 116 S.Ct. 1422, 134 L.Ed.2d 547 (1996); In re Stac Electronics Sec. Litig., 89 F.3d 1399, 1405 n. 4 (9th Cir.1996). Merisel argues that the transcripts and other documentary evidence are part of the complaint and therefore can be reviewed in evaluating the district court's dismissal. 32 In the complaint, plaintiffs make allegations about the conference calls, but do not expressly mention or refer to the transcripts, or even identify their existence. In fact, the transcripts themselves apparently did not exist at the time plaintiffs filed their complaint; they first appeared as exhibits to Merisel's motion to dismiss, and they are accompanied by a declaration describing their transcription from tapes. Further, plaintiffs disputed the authenticity and accuracy of the transcripts in the district court, and objected to their use; they repeat those objections here. The transcripts therefore cannot be considered in ruling on the motion to dismiss. 33 The same holds true for the declaration submitted by Merisel to explain that the internal projections were faxed not to securities analysts but to the corporate finance department of Robinson-Humphrey. The declaration assumes that the projections attached to it as an exhibit are those referred to in the complaint, and then proceeds to explain that the corporate finance department did not share information with the securities analysts within Robinson-Humphrey. None of this is referenced in the complaint, and plaintiffs objected to these declarations in the district court and on this appeal. 34 Merisel cites Townsend v. Columbia Operations, 667 F.2d 844 (9th Cir.1982), to support its position but that case was converted by the district court from a motion to dismiss to one for summary judgment because of the need to examine certain documents. Id. at 848. The issue therefore was not whether the particular documents could be considered on appeal from an order of dismissal, but rather whether they were properly in the appellate record on an appeal from summary judgment. 35 In this appeal, we decline to consider any of the documentary evidence filed with the motion to dismiss.