STANDARD OF REVIEW
Commonwealth Land has moved to dismiss all claims for failure to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In deciding a Motion to
Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), a court must “accept all factual allegations as true, construe the
complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and determine whether, under a reasonable
reading of the complaint, the plaintiff may be entitled to relief.” Phillips v. County of Allegheny,
515 F.3d 224, 233 (3d Cir. 2008) (reasoning that this statement of the Rule 12(b)(6) standard remains
acceptable following U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544 (2007) (internal quotations omitted)).
To withstand a Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), “factual allegations must be enough
to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Phillips, 515 F.3d at 234. When a complaint
contains well-pleaded factual allegations, “a court should assume their veracity and determine
whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950
(2009) (reaffirming rationale set forth in Twombly). However, a court is “not bound to accept as true
a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation.” Id. at 1949. “Threadbare recitals of the elements
of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements do not suffice.” Id. In other words,
a complaint has to “show” an entitlement to relief with its facts. Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside, 578
F.3d 203, 211 (3d Cir. 2009). See also McTernan v. City of York, 577 F.3d 521, 532 (3d Cir. 2009)
(examining Iqbal’s requirement for a complaint to state a plausible claim of relief to survive a
Motion to Dismiss).