IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
March 5, 2013
JAMES D. TOLLE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge:
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are defendant Jersey State Bank's motion to dismiss Count 1 of plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Doc. 14) and defendant United States of America's motion to dismiss Count 1 (Doc. 16) (collectively, "defendants").
Defendants similarly argue that the allegations of plaintiff's Count 1 for foreclosure of mortgage are insufficient to state a claim for relief under FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 12(b)(6). Most notably, defendants point out that plaintiff and the lender referenced in the subject mortgages are different entities. In response (Docs. 24 and 25), plaintiff seeks leave of the Court to file an amended complaint addressing what it perceives as the meritorious aspects of defendants' respective arguments.
While plaintiff concedes the salient points of defendants' motions regarding what allegations are lacking in the complaint, it does not concede the legal effect of those omissions. Regardless, the Court finds in favor of defendants regarding the necessity of certain critical facts plaintiff omitted from its Count 1. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)). Thus, without commenting as to defendants' specific arguments, the Court GRANTS defendants' motions to dismiss Count 1 of plaintiff's complaint (Docs. 14, 16). Plaintiff's Count I is dismissed without prejudice. The Court grants plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. Accordingly, plaintiff shall file its amended complaint by April 4, 2013. Upon review of plaintiff's amended allegations, defendants will be able to renew their specific arguments should they feel such arguments are necessary.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Digitally signed by Date: 2013.03.05 10:13:52 -06'00'
David R. Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.