motion until defendant’s final brief, plaintiff was given an additional opportunity to respond. DISCUSSION 1. Summary judgment standard When a federal court reviews the sufficiency of the complaint, pursuant to a motion for summary judgment, “its task is necessarily a limited one.” Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974). “The issue is not whether a plaintiff will ultimately prevail but whether the claimant is entitled to offer evidence to support the claims.” Id. To this end, the court must accept as true the facts alleged in the complaint, see Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 747 (Fed.Cir.1988), and must construe such facts in the light most favorable to the pleader. See Henke v. United States, 60 F.3d 795, 797 (Fed.Cir. 1995) (<HOLDING>). The court is not permitted to weigh the
holding that in reviewing whether there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and draw all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in favor of the jurys verdict holding that in reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and draw all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in favor of the jurys verdict recognizing the courts obligation to assume all factual allegations to be true and to draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiffs favor holding court obligated to draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiffs favor holding that triers of fact may draw only reasonable inferences