United States District Court, D. Kansas
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MURGUIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Barbara Hewitt moves to strike defendants' affirmative
defenses, to dismiss defendants Larry Alsup, Allied Business
Solutions, LLC, and Allied Business Solutions Inc.'s
(“ABS”) counterclaims, and in the alternative for
a more definite statement. (Doc. 9.)
formerly worked for defendants. Defendants ABS are two
businesses that assist companies with various telecom needs,
and the president of those businesses. Plaintiff filed suit
against defendants for various employment-related claims
including failure to pay wages, breach of contract, and
fraud. Defendants answered the complaint, generally raised
several affirmative defenses without pleading additional
facts, and brought counterclaims for breach of contract,
misappropriation of trade secrets, and breach of the duty of
relevant to the present motion, the parties submit multiple
employment contracts, dispute plaintiff's former
employment status, and dispute which agreement is the
operative employment contract. Plaintiff now moves to strike
defendants' generally-pleaded affirmative defenses as
inadequately pleaded under the Iqbal/Twombly
framework; to dismiss defendants' counterclaims as
inadequately pleaded under their relevant theories; and in
the alternative for a more definite statement to require
defendants to more clearly define their claims for breach of
contract and misappropriation of trade secrets.
motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6), the court assumes true all well-pleaded facts in
the complaint, disregards all legal conclusions worded as
factual allegations, and grants the non-moving party all
reasonable inferences from the pleadings. Colony Ins. Co.
v. Burke, 698 F.3d 1222, 1228 (10th Cir. 2012). To
survive a motion to dismiss, the complaint “must
contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state
a claim to relief that is plausible on its face, ” not
merely possible. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Co. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 570 (2007)) (quotation marks omitted); see
Ridge at Red Hawk, L.L.C. v. Schneider, 493 F.3d 1174,
1177 (10th Cir. 2007).
court will grant a motion under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(f) only if a pleading “is so vague or
ambiguous that the [moving] party cannot reasonably prepare a
response.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(e). Rule 12(e) motions
“are disfavored in light of the liberal discovery
provided under the federal rules[, ]” and are granted
only when “the claims alleged are [insufficient] to
enable a responsive pleading in the form of a denial or
admission.” Peterson v. Brownlee, 314
F.Supp.2d 1150, 1155-56 (D. Kan. 2004) (citations omitted).
Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) allows the court to strike from
a pleading “any redundant, immaterial, impertinent or
scandalous matter.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f). The court has
discretion to strike an “insufficient defense”
from a pleading when no circumstances exist under which that
defense can succeed as a matter of law. Wilhelm v. TLC
Lawn Care, Inc., No. 07-2465-KHV, 2008 WL 474265, at *2
(D. Kan. Feb. 19, 2008); Resolution Trust Corp. v.
Tri-State Realty Inv'rs of K.C., Inc., 838 F.Supp.
1448, 1450 (D. Kan. 1993). Motions to strike are disfavored
and the striking of an affirmative defense is a
“drastic remedy.” Wilhelm, 2008 WL
474265, at *2.
court will first address plaintiff's motion to strike
before turning to her motion to dismiss and her ...