[____________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

[____________________] COUNTY, NEVADA

[PLAINTIFF'S FULL NAME],

    Plaintiff,

v.                                            Case No. [____________________]

[DEFENDANT'S FULL NAME],

    Defendant.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

PURSUANT TO NRCP 12(b)

[DEFENDANT'S FULL NAME] ("Defendant"), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby moves this Court pursuant to NRCP 12(b) (as amended March 1, 2019) to dismiss the Complaint filed by [PLAINTIFF'S FULL NAME] ("Plaintiff"), with prejudice, on the grounds set forth below.

IMPORTANT PREFATORY NOTE: 2019 NRCP AMENDMENTS

On March 1, 2019, the Nevada Supreme Court's comprehensive amendments to the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure (NRCP) took effect. These amendments substantially rewrote the NRCP to conform more closely to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). Key changes relevant to motions to dismiss include:

• NRCP 12(b) was restructured to mirror FRCP 12(b), using the same seven-defense framework;
• NRCP 8(a) now requires "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief," mirroring the federal pleading standard;
• The former Nevada "demurrer" practice was eliminated;
• Answer deadline was changed from 20 days (under former NRCP) to 21 days (to mirror the federal rule);
• Consolidation of pre-answer motions is now required under NRCP 12(g).

Counsel must cite to the post-2019 rules. References to the pre-2019 NRCP or Nevada demurrer practice are obsolete.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff filed this action on [__/__/____], alleging [________________________________]. For the reasons set forth herein, the Complaint must be dismissed because [________________________________].

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

1. Plaintiff filed the Complaint on [__/__/____].

2. Defendant was served with the Summons and Complaint on [__/__/____].

3. This Motion is timely filed. Under NRCP 12(b), a pre-answer motion to dismiss must be made before or simultaneously with the responsive pleading. The answer would otherwise be due within 21 days after service of the summons and complaint under NRCP 12(a)(1)(A).

4. Pursuant to NRCP 12(g)(2), a party that makes a motion under NRCP 12 must raise all defenses and objections then available. Defendant raises all applicable defenses in this single motion to comply with the consolidation requirement.

III. GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL

Defendant moves to dismiss on the following grounds under NRCP 12(b) (check all that apply):

☐ NRCP 12(b)(1) — Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction
This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claims in the Complaint because [________________________________].

☐ NRCP 12(b)(2) — Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Defendant lacks sufficient minimum contacts with Nevada to satisfy due process. See NRS 14.065 (Nevada Long-Arm Statute).

☐ NRCP 12(b)(3) — Improper Venue
Venue is improper in [____________________] County because [________________________________]. Proper venue lies in [____________________] County pursuant to NRS 13.010 et seq.

☐ NRCP 12(b)(4) — Insufficient Process
The process served upon Defendant was insufficient because [________________________________].

☐ NRCP 12(b)(5) — Insufficient Service of Process
Service of process was insufficient because [________________________________], in violation of NRCP 4.

☐ NRCP 12(b)(6) — Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted
The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Complaint does not contain sufficient factual allegations to state a plausible claim for relief under Nevada's post-2019 pleading standard.

☐ NRCP 12(b)(7) — Failure to Join a Required Party
The Complaint fails to join a required party under NRCP 19, specifically [________________________________], whose absence prevents the Court from according complete relief.

IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS

5. Plaintiff is [________________________________], a [resident/entity] of [____________________].

6. Defendant is [________________________________], a [resident/entity] of [____________________].

7. The Complaint asserts [____] count(s) for [________________________________].

8. Specifically, the Complaint alleges [________________________________].

9. The Complaint further alleges [________________________________].

10. [Continue with additional factual paragraphs as necessary, citing specific Complaint paragraphs.]

V. MEMORANDUM OF LAW

A. Nevada's Post-2019 Pleading Standard

Following the 2019 NRCP amendments, Nevada adopted language for NRCP 8(a) that mirrors FRCP 8(a), requiring "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." However, the Nevada Supreme Court's Advisory Committee noted in adopting the 2019 amendments that, by adopting the federal rule text, it did not intend to automatically import the federal Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard, leaving the question of whether Nevada should adopt that standard to judicial development.

As of the current date, Nevada courts have applied the standard on a case-by-case basis. The Nevada Supreme Court has cited the plausibility language in some decisions, requiring that a complaint "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." See, e.g., Sanchez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 125 Nev. 818, 826 (2009) (pre-2019); post-2019 decisions. Nonetheless, the precise scope of Nevada's pleading standard post-2019 continues to evolve.

On a motion under NRCP 12(b)(6), the Court must:
1. Accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true;
2. Draw all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor; and
3. Determine whether the complaint states any plausible claim for relief.

The Court need not accept legal conclusions couched as factual allegations, formulaic recitations of elements, or wholly conclusory statements.

B. Failure to State a Claim — NRCP 12(b)(6)

(Include if NRCP 12(b)(6) is checked)

1. Applicable Standard

To survive a motion to dismiss under NRCP 12(b)(6), the complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim for relief. The plausibility standard requires that plaintiff allege facts that tend to support the claim, not merely a sheer possibility that defendant acted unlawfully. See discussion of NRCP 8(a) above.

2. Count [____] — [Name of Claim]

Under Nevada law, to state a claim for [________________________________], a plaintiff must allege:
(1) [________________________________];
(2) [________________________________];
(3) [________________________________]; and
(4) [________________________________].

See [Nevada case citation].

The Complaint fails to state this claim because:

a. Paragraph [____] of the Complaint states: "[________________________________]." This is a bare legal conclusion without supporting factual content.

b. The Complaint does not allege [________________________________], which is an essential element of this claim.

c. Even accepting all factual allegations as true and drawing all inferences in Plaintiff's favor, the Complaint does not plausibly state a claim for [________________________________] because [________________________________].

3. Count [____] — [Name of Additional Claim]

[Repeat for each additional count.]

C. Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction — NRCP 12(b)(1)

(Include if NRCP 12(b)(1) is checked)

Nevada district courts have general jurisdiction over civil matters under Nev. Const. Art. VI, § 6 and NRS 3.223. However, subject matter jurisdiction is lacking here because [________________________________].

Subject matter jurisdiction is a non-waivable defect. Under NRCP 12(h)(3), whenever it appears that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action. In this case, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because [________________________________].

D. Lack of Personal Jurisdiction — NRCP 12(b)(2)

(Include if NRCP 12(b)(2) is checked)

Nevada's long-arm statute, NRS 14.065, extends personal jurisdiction over non-resident defendants to the maximum extent permitted by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. To establish personal jurisdiction, the plaintiff must show:

1. That Defendant has minimum contacts with Nevada — either:
   - Specific jurisdiction: the claims arise out of or relate to Defendant's Nevada contacts; or
   - General jurisdiction: Defendant's contacts are so continuous and systematic as to render it "essentially at home" in Nevada; and

2. That exercising jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945).

In this case, Defendant lacks the requisite minimum contacts with Nevada because [________________________________]. Defendant is not incorporated in Nevada, does not maintain a principal place of business in Nevada, and the claims in this action do not arise from any Nevada-based activity.

E. Improper Venue — NRCP 12(b)(3)

(Include if NRCP 12(b)(3) is checked)

Nevada venue is governed by NRS 13.010 et seq. For most civil actions, venue is proper in the county where:
- Any defendant resides at the time of commencement of the action;
- The cause of action arose; or
- The property that is the subject of the action is situated.

See NRS 13.010; NRS 13.040.

In this case, venue is improper in [____________________] County because [________________________________]. The proper venue is [____________________] County because [________________________________].

F. Insufficient Service of Process — NRCP 12(b)(5)

(Include if NRCP 12(b)(5) is checked)

Under NRCP 4, service of process must be accomplished in the manner specified by rule. For service on a corporation, process must be served upon the corporation's registered agent, any officer or director, or any agent authorized by appointment or law to receive service. See NRCP 4(d)(4).

In this case, service was defective because [________________________________]. Specifically, [________________________________]. As a result, this Court has not acquired personal jurisdiction over Defendant through proper service of process, and the Complaint must be dismissed.

G. Failure to Join a Required Party — NRCP 12(b)(7)

(Include if NRCP 12(b)(7) is checked)

Under NRCP 19, a party is required to be joined if:
(a) In the party's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among the existing parties; or
(b) The party claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and disposing of the action without the party may impair the party's ability to protect that interest, or may leave existing parties subject to inconsistent obligations.

In this case, [________________________________] is a required party because [________________________________]. Without [________________________________]'s joinder, complete relief cannot be granted to any party, and/or the existing parties face the risk of inconsistent obligations. The action should be dismissed for failure to join this required party.

VI. NEVADA PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS

A. Deadlines

See NRCP 12(a)(4) (effect of a pre-answer motion on answer deadline).

B. Consolidation of Defenses

Under NRCP 12(g)(2), a party that makes a pre-answer motion must raise all available Rule 12 defenses and objections in that motion, or waive those not raised (subject to the exceptions in NRCP 12(h)).

Preserved defenses (may be raised at any time):
- Subject matter jurisdiction (NRCP 12(b)(1))
- Failure to state a claim (NRCP 12(b)(6))
- Failure to join an indispensable party (NRCP 12(b)(7))

Waivable defenses (must be raised in first Rule 12 motion or in the answer):
- Personal jurisdiction (NRCP 12(b)(2))
- Venue (NRCP 12(b)(3))
- Insufficient process (NRCP 12(b)(4))
- Insufficient service of process (NRCP 12(b)(5))

C. Electronic Filing — Nevada eFlex

This Motion is filed through the Nevada eFlex electronic filing system (used in Clark County and other Nevada courts). Attorneys practicing in Nevada must be registered in the applicable court's e-filing system. Filings must comply with technical requirements including PDF format, file size limits, and required metadata.

• Clark County: https://eflex.nvcourts.gov/
• Washoe County: Verify current system with court clerk

D. Local Rules

Nevada district courts may have local rules governing briefing schedules, page limits, and oral argument procedures. Counsel must consult the local rules for the specific district.

• Clark County (Eighth Judicial District): Rules 2.20 et seq. (motion practice)
• Washoe County (Second Judicial District): Local Rules applicable to civil motions

VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. Grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint in its entirety, with prejudice;

2. In the alternative, dismiss the specific claims identified above;

3. Award Defendant its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the extent permitted by law;

4. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]
    [Attorney's Full Name]
    Nevada Bar No. [____________________]
    [Firm Address]
    [City], Nevada [____]
    Telephone: ([____]) [____]-[________]
    Facsimile: ([____]) [____]-[________]
    Email: [________________________________]

Attorney for Defendant [____________________]

Dated: [__/__/____]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendant's Motion to Dismiss was served upon all counsel of record through the Nevada eFlex electronic filing system, which provides notice of filing to all registered users, and/or by the following method:

Plaintiff's Counsel:
[Attorney's Full Name]
[Firm Name]
[Address]
[City], Nevada [____]
Email: [________________________________]

☐ Via Nevada eFlex Electronic Filing System
☐ Via United States Mail, First-Class, postage prepaid
☐ Via Email (with consent)
☐ Via Hand Delivery

[________________________________]
[Attorney's Name]
Dated: [__/__/____]

EXHIBIT LIST

NEVADA-SPECIFIC NOTES FOR COUNSEL

1. 2019 Amendments — Critical: The 2019 NRCP amendments represent a fundamental overhaul of Nevada civil procedure. All citations and arguments should reference the post-2019 rules. Do not cite the former Nevada NRCP or demurrer cases.

2. Plausibility Standard — Still Developing: Nevada has not definitively adopted the federal Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard as of the last review. Courts have applied it in some cases but the Supreme Court has not expressly endorsed it post-2019. Argue in the alternative: the complaint fails under both any conceivable standard and the plausibility standard.

3. 21-Day Answer Deadline: The pre-2019 deadline was 20 days. Post-2019, it is 21 days to mirror the federal rule. Calendar accordingly.

4. Demurrer is Abolished: The former Nevada demurrer has been replaced by the NRCP 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Do not use "demurrer" terminology.

5. Nevada Long-Arm Statute (NRS 14.065): Unlike some states, Nevada's long-arm statute explicitly extends to the constitutional limit. The analysis is purely a due process minimum contacts analysis.

6. Clark County vs. Other Counties: Clark County (Las Vegas) has specific local rules and uses eFlex for e-filing. Washoe County (Reno) may use a different system. Verify the applicable e-filing platform for the county where the action is filed.

7. Statute of Limitations: Nevada's general limitations period is 6 years for written contracts (NRS 11.190(1)(b)), 4 years for oral contracts (NRS 11.190(2)), 3 years for personal injury (NRS 11.190(4)(e)), and 2 years for professional malpractice (NRS 11.207). Identify the applicable period for the claims at issue.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure (post-2019): https://www.leg.state.nv.us/courtrules/nrcp.html
• 2019 NRCP Amendment Overview: https://nvbar.org/wp-content/uploads/NRCP-Slides-05-02-19.pdf
• NRCP 12 Redline Against FRCP: https://nvcourts.gov/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/14315/nrcp_12.pdf
• Nevada eFlex (Clark County): https://eflex.nvcourts.gov/
• NRS Chapter 14 (Jurisdiction): https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-014.html