If the court thinks a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim should be granted, but believes the plaintiff could likely state a claim if she just added a few more factual details, what should the court do?

• A. Dismiss without predjudice
• B. Grant the motion
• C. Stay the case
• D. Dismiss with prejudice

Answer: (A)

When a complaint is fatally flawed on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion but the defect can be cured by adding a few facts, the court should dismiss without prejudice to give the plaintiff a chance to amend. This reflects the court’s willingness to let a potentially meritorious claim be saved through a cure to the pleading, rather than foreclosing it entirely.

Why this is the best answer: dismissing without prejudice preserves the plaintiff’s opportunity to fix the pleading and proceed, aligning with the liberal pleading philosophy and Rule 15(a)’s allowance for amendment. If the court granted dismissal with prejudice, it would bar the claim even though it could be stated with more detail. Staying the case isn’t necessary because amendment is available, and simply granting a dismissal without prejudice provides a clear path for an amended complaint to be filed.

Note: If the plaintiff later amends and the court still finds the claim defective, or if amendment would be futile, then dismissal with prejudice would be appropriate.