because the allegedly false statements plausibly have the capacity to mislead. Finally, Count XII must be dismissed because the FDCPA’s cease communications provisions are not violated where a communication is sent directly to the debtor as required by state law. An appropriate Order will issue. 1 . 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p(2006). 2 . The facts stated herein are derived from plaintiffs’ second amended complaint and are assumed to be true for the purpose of considering Mancini’s motions to dismiss. See Trulock v. Freeh, 275 F.3d 391, 399 (4th Cir.2001). Also properly considered are the documents referenced by the second amended complaint that are essential to plaintiffs’ claims, as their authenticity is not disputed. See Phillips v. LCI Int’l, Inc., 190 F.3d 609, 618 (4th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>)- 3 . Although the letter is addressed to
holding that 1 the complaint is deemed to include any documents incorporated in it by reference and any document upon which it solely relies and which is integral to the complaint and that the court may consider such documents on a motion to dismiss pursuant to fedrcivp 12b6 holding that in connection with a motion to dismiss the court may consider a document not attached to the pleadings where the plaintiffs claim depends on the contents of a document the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss and the parties do not dispute the authenticity of the document even though the plaintiff does not explicitly allege the contents of that document in the complaint holding that a court ruling on a motion to dismiss may consider a document that is referenced in the complaint and is central to the plaintiffs claims holding that although a district court may not consider matters extraneous to the pleadings a document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint may be considered without converting the motion to dismiss in one for summary judgment holding that a court may consider a document submitted by a defendant in determining whether to dismiss the complaint because it was integral to and explicitly relied on in the complaint and because the plaintiffs do not challenge its authenticity