-2-a news article on its webpage and “subsequently allow[ing] unfiltered online comments whichcontained false information.” (
at 3, 5). The defendants filed the present Motion to Dismissseeking dismissal of some of Miles’ claims.
In order to avoid dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must plead “enough factsto state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
, 550 U.S. 544,570 (2007). “Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculativelevel, on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful infact.)”
, 550 U.S. at 555. The court “accepts all well-pleaded facts as true, viewingthem in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.”
In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litig.
, 495 F.3d191, 205 (5th Cir. 2007). If a court considers matters outside the pleadings, the motion todismiss must be treated as a motion for summary judgment, but “[d]ocuments that a defendantattaches to a motion to dismiss are considered part of the pleadings if they are referred to in the plaintiff’s complaint and are central to her claim.”
Causey v. Sewell Cadillac-Chevrolet, Inc.
,394 F.3d 285, 288 (5th Cir. 2004). In the present case, the defendants attached a copy of thenewspaper article at issue in this case as an exhibit to their Motion. Because the article ismentioned in the Complaint and is central to Miles’ claims, the article is a part of the pleadings,and thus, it is not necessary to convert the Motion to a Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. DEFAMATION AND FALSE LIGHTA. The Website Article
The defendants argue that Miles’ claims concerning the website article should bedismissed because she does not allege that the information contained in the article is false and the
Case 1:09-cv-00713-LG-RHW Document 24 Filed 08/26/10 Page 2 of 5