whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” In the context of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, courts may take judicial notice under FRE 201(b)(2) of “public disclosure documents required by law to be filed.” Kramer v. Time Warner Inc., 937 F.2d 767, 774 (2d Cir.1991). In ruling on a motion to dismiss, courts may “consider matters of which they may take judicial notice.” See, e.g., Stone v. Life Partners Holdings, Inc., 26 F.Supp.3d 575, 603 (W.D.Tex.2014) The plain reading of FRE 201(d) supports such a result, as the rule states, “The court may take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding.” Applying the plain language of FRE 201(d), the Fifth Circuit has permitted lower courts to take judicial notice at the motion to dismiss stage of a proceeding. See, e.g., Dorsey, 540 F.3d at 338 (<HOLDING>); Lovelace v. Software Spectrum, Inc., 78 F.3d
recognizing that a court is permitted to rely on documents incorporated into the complaint by reference and matters of which a court may take judicial notice recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice recognizing that a court may take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of public record holding that in considering a rule 12b6 motion a court may only rely on the complaint its proper attachments documents incorporated into the complaint by reference and matters of which a court may take judicial notice holding that a court in deciding a rule 12b6 motion may consider a document that is incorporated by reference into the complaint