A court may dismiss a complaint “only if it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations.” Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73, 104 S.Ct. 2229, 81 L.Ed.2d 59 (1984). Applying this standard, we consider each of the district court’s rulings in turn. A. Dismissal of Cajuste’s Claims pursuant to the Statute of Limitations Under the TVPA and the ATCA, Plaintiffs have ten years from the date the cause of action arose to bring suit for torture, extrajudicial killing and other torts committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. Cabello v. Fernandez-Larios, 402 F.3d 1148, 1154-55 (11th Cir.2005) (citation omitted); see also Papa v. United States, 281 F.3d 1004, 1012-13 (9th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>); Doe v. Islamic Salvation Front, 257 F.Supp.2d
holding that for oral contracts as opposed to written ones the fiveyear statute of limitations applies rather than the tenyear statute of limitations holding that version of tenyear catchall statute of limitations did not apply to action to quiettitle holding that duress toll to statute of limitations under state law had no application to federal rico statute of limitations holding that a twoyear statute of limitations applies to negligence claims under texas law holding tenyear statute of limitations applies to the tvpa and atca