Did the Ninth Circuit err in determining that the District Court properly incorporated the Ruling in the State Court Injunction Action on a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Ninth Circuit err in determining that the District Court properly incorporated the Ruling in . the State Court Injunction Action on a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss when the only purpose for doing so was to controvert Dr. Sharifi’s allegations and resolve disputed material facts in favor of defendants? 2. Comcast held that the §1981 Plaintiff must initially plead, and ultimately prove that Defendant’s intentional discrimination on account of race was a “but-for” cause of Plaintiff's injury. Considering the additional pleading requirements announced in /gbal and Twomb/y in order to state a plausible claim for relief, are a plaintiffs well-pled allegations still taken as true, including all reasonable inferences, even when Defendant offers competing explanations? 3. Did the district court (and Ninth Circuit) err in dismissing — at the pleading stage — Dr. Sharifi’s examples of non-Arab physicians who were disparately treated when exhibiting the same or similar conduct of which Dr. Sharifi is accused? 4. The Arizona Medical Board (AMB) is an impartial Agency and the ultimate adjudicator of all Arizona physicians' ethical and professional conduct. It has the legal duty to regulate, and if necessary, penalize physicians for patient care issues, alteration of medical records and disruptive behavior; all considered very serious violations under the Medical ii Practice Act of the State of Arizona. These alleged transgressions were the raceneutral bases and the competing reasons cited by Banner in terminating Dr. Sharifi. The AMB repeatedly dismissed all such allegations. After several prolonged and comprehensive investigations, the AMB considered them to be “without merit”. Did both the District Court, and the Ninth Circuit err by not taking into account any of the AMB's numerous determinations that these race neutral causes were “without merit” thereby reducing the strength of the “so convincing” status of the competing causes which had led to the implausibility of Sharifi’s allegations at the pleading stage? Statement of