LEGAL STANDARD FOR MOTION TO DISMISS.
A complaint should not be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) unless it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of fads in .support ofils claims which would ciililk-plaintiff to relief. NOW. Inc. v. Schiedler. 510 U.S. 249, 256, 114 S. Ct. 798, 803 (1994);
Cervantes v. City of San Diego. 5 F.3d 1273, 1274-75 (9th Cir. 1993). Dismissal may be based either on the lack of cognizable legal theories or the lack of pleading sufficient facts to support cognizable legal theories. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't. 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).
The complaint's factual allegations are accepted as true. Church ofScientologv of California v. Fivnn. 744 F.2d 694 (9th Cir. 1984). The court construes the pleading in the liglit most favorable to plaintiff and resolves all doubts in plaintiffs favor. Parks School of Business, Inc. v. Svmington. 51 F.3d 1480, 1484 (9th Cir. 1995). General allegations are presumed to include specific facts necessary to support the claim. NOW. 510 U.S. at 256, 114 S. Ct. at 803. quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife. 504 U.S. 555, 561, 112 S. Ct. 2130, 2137 (1992).
The court may disregard allegations contradicted by the complaint's attached exhibits. Durning v. First Boston Corp.. 815 F.2d 1265, 1267 (9th Cir. 1987): Steckman v. Hart Brewing. Inc.. 143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998). Furthermore, the court is not required to accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially noticed facts. Mullis v. United States Bankruptcy Ct.. 828 F.2d 1385, 1388 (9th Cir. 1987). The court may consider matters of public record, including pleadings, orders, and other papers filed with the court. Mack v. South Bay Beer Distributors. 798 F.2d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 1986). abrogated on other grounds by Astoria Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n v. Solimino. 501 U.S. 104, 111 S. Ct. 2166 (1991). "The court is not required to accept legal conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations iftliose conclusions cannot reasonably be drawn from the facts alleged." Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network. 18 F.3d 752 (9th Cir. 1994). Neither need the court accept unreasonable inferences, or
unwarranted deductions of fact. See Western Mining Council v. Watt, 643 F.2d 618, 624 (91 h Cir. 1981).
2