whether-the-plaintiff's-allegation-of-joint-employers-not-paying-is-enough-for-fcp-rule-8(a)'s-short-and-plain-statement-requirement

QUESTIONS PRESENTED .a) In Civil rights complaint, when the Plaintiff alleged that Joint| employers did not pay to the plaintiff is enough for FCP Rule 8(a)’s short and plain statement requirement? . Conley v. Gibson, 355 US 41 Supreme Court 1957 @ 48 “Following the simple guide of Rule 8 (f) that "all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial : justice” , Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park, Inc , 396 US 229 Supreme Court 1969 @ 239240 Whhere federally protected rights have been invaded, it has been the rule from the beginning that courts will be alert to adjust their remedies so as to grant the necessary relief. And it is also well settled that where legal rights have | been invaded, and a federal statute provides for a general right to sue for such invasion, federal courts may use any available remedy to make good the wrong done." Id., at 684. : b) When the complaint survived for motion under FCP Rule 12(b)(6), Dist Court dismissed the complaint under Rule 8(a) and USCA 3" circuit affirmed under Rule 8(a) is error? Davis v. Ruby Foods, Inc., 269 F. 3d 818 Court of Appeals, 7th Cir 2001 @ 821 "If the [trial] Court understood the allegations sufficiently to determine that they could state a claim for relief, the complaint has satisfied Rule 8." Kittay u. Kornstein, 230 F. 3d 531 Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2000 at 541 c) When the plaintiff Independent Software engineer is not paid by the joint-employers for his Computer Software work to them. Should the Dist Court & USCA 3*4 deny the copyright ownership to the plaintiff independent software engineer? The Copyright Act of 1976 (Act 1976 17U.S. C. §§ 201 (a), 17 U.S.C. § 102(a). USS. Const. art. I, § 8, el. 8 1 Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 US 730 —Supr. Ct 1989 d) United States Court of Appeals’ one judge alone deliver the opinion for a unanimous Court? I (a)