Motion to Dismiss

IN THE [____] DISTRICT COURT OF [________________________________] COUNTY

STATE OF UTAH

[PLAINTIFF'S FULL NAME],
Plaintiff,

v.

[DEFENDANT'S FULL NAME],
Defendant.

Case No.: [____________________]

Judge: [________________________________]

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

Pursuant to Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant [________________________________] ("Defendant") moves this Court pursuant to Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) to dismiss Plaintiff [________________________________]'s [☐ Complaint / ☐ Amended Complaint / ☐ other: ____________________] (the "Complaint"), filed on [__/__/____], for the grounds stated below. Defendant respectfully asserts that [☐ one or more / ☐ all] of Plaintiff's claims must be dismissed as a matter of law.

II. GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL

(Check ALL grounds that apply. Each checked ground is briefed in Section V below.)

☐ Rule 12(b)(1) — Lack of subject-matter jurisdiction
☐ Rule 12(b)(2) — Lack of personal jurisdiction
☐ Rule 12(b)(3) — Improper venue
☐ Rule 12(b)(4) — Insufficiency of process
☐ Rule 12(b)(5) — Insufficiency of service of process
☐ Rule 12(b)(6) — Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted
☐ Rule 12(b)(7) — Failure to join a necessary party under Rule 19
☐ Additional ground: [________________________________]

III. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND AND FILING INFORMATION

A. Filing Deadlines

Under Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b), a motion asserting defenses listed in 12(b)(2)–(5) must be filed before or simultaneously with the first responsive pleading. A 12(b)(6) motion may be filed with the answer or later as part of a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

• Date Complaint was served on Defendant: [__/__/____]
• Deadline for Defendant's answer or responsive motion: [__/__/____] (21 days after service under Utah R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1))
• Date this motion is filed: [__/__/____]

Note on 21-Day Answer Deadline: Under Utah R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1), a defendant must serve an answer within 21 days after service of the summons and complaint. Filing this motion tolls the time to answer for the claims addressed in the motion.

B. Briefing Requirements (Utah R. Civ. P. 7)

Under Utah R. Civ. P. 7(c):

• Supporting memorandum: Required with this motion (filed herewith as the Memorandum of Law, Section V below)
• Opposition memorandum: Due within 14 days after service of this motion
• Reply memorandum: Due within 7 days after service of the opposition
• Page limits: Memoranda in support and opposition are limited to 10 pages unless the court grants leave for additional pages (complex motions may be up to 20 pages with leave)

C. E-Filing

This motion is filed through the Utah Courts' electronic filing system. Represented parties in Utah district courts are required to file documents electronically unless exempted by court order. Parties may access e-filing at: https://efiling.utcourts.gov/.

IV. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

A. The Parties

1. Plaintiff [________________________________] is a [☐ natural person / ☐ corporation / ☐ LLC / ☐ other: ____________________] [☐ residing in / ☐ domiciled in / ☐ incorporated in] [________________________________].

2. Defendant [________________________________] is a [☐ natural person / ☐ corporation / ☐ LLC / ☐ other: ____________________] [☐ residing in / ☐ domiciled in / ☐ incorporated in] [________________________________].

B. Summary of Plaintiff's Claims

Plaintiff asserts the following claims against Defendant:

C. Key Allegations

Plaintiff alleges, in relevant part: [________________________________].

V. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

A. Utah's Pleading Standard — Plausibility Required

Utah has adopted the federal plausibility pleading standard. In Coroles v. State, 2015 UT 48, the Utah Supreme Court confirmed that Utah applies the Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard, rejecting the notion that bare legal conclusions are sufficient to state a claim.

Under this standard:

"A complaint must allege facts sufficient to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Coroles v. State, 2015 UT 48.

The court is not required to accept legal conclusions couched as factual allegations, nor must it accept implausible inferences or unsupported speculative assertions. Id.

In evaluating a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court:

1. Accepts all well-pleaded factual allegations as true;
2. Draws all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor;
3. Determines whether those facts state a plausible claim for relief.

B. Argument on Each Ground

GROUND 1: Rule 12(b)(1) — Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

(Complete this section if Rule 12(b)(1) is checked above.)

This Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction because:

☐ Sovereign immunity bars this claim. Under Utah Code Ann. § 63G-7-101 et seq. (Utah Governmental Immunity Act), Plaintiff's claim against a governmental entity [________________________________] is barred because [________________________________].

☐ The claim presents a non-justiciable political question involving [________________________________], which is committed to the discretion of [________________________________].

☐ Plaintiff lacks Article III-equivalent standing under Utah law because:

• Plaintiff has not suffered a concrete, particularized injury;
• Any injury is not fairly traceable to Defendant's conduct;
• The injury is not redressable by a court order.

☐ Exclusive jurisdiction over this matter is vested in [________________________________] by [________________________________].

☐ Other: [________________________________].

Authority: [________________________________].

GROUND 2: Rule 12(b)(2) — Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

(Complete this section if Rule 12(b)(2) is checked above.)

This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant because:

General Jurisdiction: Defendant does not have continuous and systematic contacts with Utah sufficient to render Defendant essentially at home in Utah. See Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915 (2011).

Specifically:
☐ Defendant is not a Utah resident or domiciliary;
☐ Defendant is not incorporated in Utah and does not have its principal place of business in Utah;
☐ Defendant does not maintain offices, employees, or agents in Utah;
☐ Defendant is not registered to do business in Utah.

Specific Jurisdiction: Defendant also lacks minimum contacts with Utah for specific jurisdiction because:

☐ The claims do not arise out of or relate to any conduct by Defendant purposefully directed at Utah;
☐ Defendant has not purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in Utah;
☐ The exercise of jurisdiction would be unreasonable under International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945), and its progeny.

Utah Long-Arm Statute: The Utah long-arm statute, Utah Code Ann. § 78B-3-205, does not reach Defendant's conduct because [________________________________].

Authority: [________________________________].

GROUND 3: Rule 12(b)(3) — Improper Venue

(Complete this section if Rule 12(b)(3) is checked above.)

Venue is improper in [________________________________] County because:

☐ Under Utah Code Ann. § 78B-3a-201, venue is proper where the defendant resides or where the cause of action arose. Neither condition is met in this county because [________________________________].

☐ The parties' contract designates [________________________________] as the exclusive venue for disputes. See Exhibit [____].

☐ Under Utah Code Ann. § [____________________], this type of claim must be brought in [________________________________] County.

Authority: [________________________________].

GROUND 4: Rule 12(b)(4) — Insufficiency of Process

(Complete this section if Rule 12(b)(4) is checked above.)

The process issued in this case is insufficient because:

☐ The summons fails to identify the court or the parties as required by Utah R. Civ. P. 4(b);
☐ The summons does not include the time within which Defendant must appear and defend;
☐ The summons was not properly signed or sealed as required by Utah R. Civ. P. 4(b);
☐ Other: [________________________________].

GROUND 5: Rule 12(b)(5) — Insufficiency of Service of Process

(Complete this section if Rule 12(b)(5) is checked above.)

Service of process was insufficient because:

☐ Personal service not effected: Process was not personally served on Defendant or an authorized agent as required by Utah R. Civ. P. 4(d);

☐ Substitute service defective: Substitute service was not made at Defendant's usual place of abode upon a person of suitable age as required;

☐ Service on entity defective: Process was not served on an officer, director, or registered agent of the defendant entity as required by Utah R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2);

☐ Time limit for service: Service was not effected within 120 days after the complaint was filed as required by Utah R. Civ. P. 4(f);

☐ Other defect: [________________________________].

GROUND 6: Rule 12(b)(6) — Failure to State a Claim

(Complete this section for each claim that fails to state a claim.)

Claim 1: [________________________________]

Elements Required: To state a claim for [________________________________] under Utah law, Plaintiff must plead facts plausibly showing: (1) [________________________________]; (2) [________________________________]; (3) [________________________________]; and (4) [________________________________].

What Plaintiff Alleged: Plaintiff alleges [________________________________]. See Complaint ¶¶ [____].

Why the Claim Fails:

☐ Missing essential element: Plaintiff has not pleaded facts plausibly supporting [________________________________] because [________________________________].

☐ Conclusory allegations only: Plaintiff's allegations regarding [________________________________] are bare legal conclusions that are not entitled to the presumption of truth under Coroles and Iqbal. Specifically, Plaintiff's allegation that "[________________________________]" is a legal conclusion, not a factual allegation.

☐ Statute of limitations: The claim for [________________________________] is barred by the [____]-year/month limitations period under Utah Code Ann. § [____________________]. The claim accrued on [__/__/____] and the Complaint was filed on [__/__/____], which is [____] [years/months] after the limitations period expired.

☐ Economic loss rule: Plaintiff's tort claim for [________________________________] is barred by the economic loss rule because the parties' relationship is governed by contract and the alleged injury is purely economic. See SME Industries, Inc. v. Thompson, 2001 UT 54.

☐ Governmental/official immunity: [________________________________] is immune from suit under Utah Code Ann. § 63G-7-101 et seq. because [________________________________].

☐ Preemption: Plaintiff's claim is preempted by [federal law / Utah statute: ________________________________] because [________________________________].

☐ Other ground: [________________________________].

Claim 2: [________________________________]

Elements Required: [________________________________].

What Plaintiff Alleged: [________________________________]. See Complaint ¶¶ [____].

Why the Claim Fails:

☐ [________________________________]
☐ [________________________________]
☐ [________________________________]

Claim 3: [________________________________]

Elements Required: [________________________________].

What Plaintiff Alleged: [________________________________]. See Complaint ¶¶ [____].

Why the Claim Fails:

☐ [________________________________]
☐ [________________________________]

GROUND 7: Rule 12(b)(7) — Failure to Join a Necessary Party

(Complete this section if Rule 12(b)(7) is checked above.)

Plaintiff has failed to join [________________________________] (the "Absent Party"), who is a necessary and/or indispensable party under Utah R. Civ. P. 19 because:

☐ Complete relief cannot be accorded among the existing parties in the Absent Party's absence;

☐ The Absent Party claims an interest in the subject of this action, and disposing of the action in the Absent Party's absence would:
☐ Impair or impede the Absent Party's ability to protect that interest; or
☐ Leave an existing party subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or inconsistent obligations.

☐ Joinder of the Absent Party is feasible because [________________________________].

☐ If joinder is not feasible, the action cannot in equity and good conscience proceed without the Absent Party because [________________________________].

VI. CONCLUSION AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. GRANT this Motion to Dismiss in its entirety;

2. DISMISS the Complaint [☐ with prejudice / ☐ without prejudice] as to [☐ all claims / ☐ the following claims: ________________________________];

3. ☐ Award Defendant its reasonable attorney's fees and costs if authorized under applicable law or contract;

4. ☐ In the alternative, if the Court declines to dismiss all claims, dismiss the following specific claims: [________________________________]; and

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

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]
[Attorney Name]
Utah State Bar No. [____________________]
[Street Address]
[City, UT ZIP]
Telephone: ([____]) [____]-[________]
Fax: ([____]) [____]-[________]
Email: [________________________________]

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT [________________________________]

Date: [__/__/____]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I electronically filed the foregoing Defendant's Motion to Dismiss with the Utah Courts' e-filing system and served a copy upon all counsel of record and/or pro se parties as listed below:

[________________________________]
[Attorney Name]

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Utah Rules of Civil Procedure — Rule 12: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/rules/view.php?type=urcp&rule=12
• Utah Rules of Civil Procedure — Rule 7: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/rules/view.php?type=urcp&rule=7
• Coroles v. State, 2015 UT 48 (Utah plausibility standard): https://law.justia.com/cases/utah/supreme-court/2015/20130217.html
• Utah Courts E-Filing: https://efiling.utcourts.gov/
• Utah Code — Title 78B (Judicial Code): https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title78B/78B.html
• Utah Governmental Immunity Act, Utah Code Ann. § 63G-7-101 et seq.: https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title63G/Chapter7/63G-7.html