to Dismiss, at 2. In American Railroad Co. of Porto Rico v. Birch, 224 U.S. 547, 32 S.Ct. 603, 56 L.Ed. 879 (1912), the Supreme Court held that the cause of action under FELA vests in the personal representative of the estate, not in the beneficiaries. While ICRC maintains that “Lisa Cain and/or Brian Cain is/are the personal representative(s) of Mr. Cain’s estate”, the defendants note that an “estate has not yet been established and a personal representative has not been appointed. The investigation of [the] accident by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is still ongoing.” Motion to Dismiss, at 2. As noted above, “conelusory allegations” need not be accepted as true in deciding upon a motion to dismiss. See Taylor v. Books A Million, Inc., 296 F.3d 376 (5th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the Court need not give credence to
recognizing inferential factual allegations to defeat a motion to dismiss holding that plaintiffs conelusory allegation in his complaint that his suit was timely was insufficient to defeat motion to dismiss holding that a mere allegation of fraud is insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss pursuant to the pslra holding that conclusory allegation in complaint was insufficient to demonstrate that defendant offered to sell goods within new york holding that making a nonfrivolous allegation is insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction