Int. Norcent Tech. v. Koninklijke Philips

Full title: INTERNATIONAL NORCENT TECHNOLOGY, a California Corporation…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 22, 2009

323 F. App'x 571 (9th Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 07-56871.

Argued and Submitted April 15, 2009.

Filed April 22, 2009.

Bruce G. Chapman, Esquire, Joseph James Mellema, Esquire, Minda R. Schechter, Connolly Bove Lodge Hutz, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Danielle Y. Conley, Esquire, A. Stephen Hut, Esquire, A. Douglas Melamed, Esquire, Ryan Patrick Phair, Esquire, Wilmerhale LLP, Washington, DC, Robert L. Corbin, Esquire, Michael W. Fitzgerald, Esquire, Corbin Fitzgerald LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-07-00043-MMM.

Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, PREGERSON, Circuit Judge and QUIST,^_ District Judge.

_ The Honorable Gordon J. Quist, United States District Judge for the Western District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ^__

__ This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

We review de novo the district court's order dismissing Norcent's complaint for failure to state a claim, taking the facts alleged in the complaint as true and construing them in a light favorable to plaintiff. Les Shockley Racing, Inc. v. Nat'l Hot Rod Ass'n, 884 F.2d 504, 507 (9th Cir. 1989). Norcent did not plead facts with adequate specificity to state a claim. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007); Kendall v. Visa U.S.A., Inc., 518 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2008).

AFFIRMED.