Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 1 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Ryan A. Hamilton NEVADA BAR NO. 11587 HAMILTON LAW 5125 S. Durango Dr., Ste. C Las Vegas, NV 89113 (702) 818-1818 (702) 974-1139 ryan@hamiltonlawlasvegas.com Attorney for the plaintiffs, David, Stacy, and Jack Welch

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA DAVID WELCH, a Texas Citizen; STACY WELCH, a Texas Citizen; and JACK WELCH, a Texas Citizen, Plaintiffs, vs. NARCONON FRESH START d/b/a RAINBOW CANYON RETREAT, a California Corporation; and DOES 1-100, ROE Corporations I X, inclusive, Defendants.

Case No. 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH

PLAINTIFFS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CERTAIN RESPONSES TO THE COMPLAINT TO BE DEEMED ADMITTED AND TO REQUIRE DEFENDANT TO FULFILL ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 8(b)(2) In its Opposition, Defendant Narconon Fresh Start (Narconon) continues to plead ignorance as to the contents of its own treatment program. And, despite the fact that Narconon already filed an Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint (albeit a deficient one), Narconon now asserts that the Complaint violated Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and therefore the case should be dismissed. The

24 25

Court should not countenance Narconons feigned ignorance about itself.

1

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 2 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

The Court should deem admitted paragraphs of Plaintiffs Complaint that contain basic factual allegations about Narconon and its drug treatment program to which Narconon improperly pleads it lacks knowledge. These are paragraphs 17, 35, 37, 39, 40, 42, 43, 50, 51, 52, 55, 58, and 67 of Plaintiffs Complaint. Alternatively, the Court should require Narconon to re-plead its pleas of lack of knowledge and its blanket denials in its Answer so that they fairly respond to the substance of the allegation[s] as required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(2). DATED this 16th day of April, 2014. HAMILTON LAW, LLC By: /s/Ryan A. Hamilton Ryan A. Hamilton NV Bar No. 11587 5125 S. Durango Ste., C Las Vegas, NV 89113

POINTS AND AUTHORITIES Plaintiffs sued Narconon for inducing Plaintiff Jack Welch to enter its treatment program with false promises and for providing Jack with only Scientology as treatment. In addition, Jack sustained serious injuries undergoing Narconons sauna program that Plaintiffs allege is nothing more than a dangerous Scientology ritual. Based on Plaintiff Jack Welchs experience at Narconon, Plaintiffs Complaint makes factual allegations about the contents of Narconons treatment program and how it operates. These allegations are central to Plaintiffs claims and necessarily within Narconons personal knowledge. In Narconons Brief in Opposition, Narconon variously asserts that it could not respond to Plaintiffs allegations about its own treatment program because the allegations are too vague immaterial argumentative, or immaterial. To that end, Narconon has moved to dismiss the Complaint fails.
2

despite having already answered it

for violating Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. Each argument

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 3 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

As an initial matter, under the pleading standards articulated in the United States Supreme Courts decisions Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009) and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556 (2007), Plaintiffs were required to allege sufficient facts to state plausible claims for relief. Plaintiffs failure to set forth sufficient facts such that their claims lacked plausibility under Twombly and Iqbal could have left their case susceptible to dismissal for failure to state a claim. Moreover, Plaintiffs were required to plead Narconons fraud with particularity under Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b). Plaintiffs satisfied these pleading standards in their Complaint by alleging what false

promises Narconon made, who made them, and how Plaintiffs were harmed. Further, to allege
10

sufficiently that Narconon treated Jack Welch only with Scientology, Plaintiffs allege that the
11 12 13

subject matter taught in the Narconon program is also found in the book Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought. More simply, in their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege what the Narconon program contains and

14

how it operates. Narconons assertions that it cannot answer as to the contents of its own program
15

is an obvious sham.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3

It is well-settled that a partys assertion of lack of knowledge does not serve as a denial if the claim of ignorance is obviously a sham. Harvey Aluminum (Inc.) v. N.L.R.B., 335 F.2d 749, 758 (9th Cir. 1964). Nevertheless, Narconon asserts that Harvey is distinguishable because unlike in Harvey, Plaintiffs allegations do not relate to findings of the companys Board of Directors. Opposition at 9 10. Moreover, Narconon asserts that it has never addressed the precise issues in Plaintiffs Complaint. Id. Narconons attempts to distinguish Harvey and similar cases are unavailing. Of course, the rule that sham assertions of ignorance do not serve as denials is not specific to findings of Boards

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 4 of 9 of Directors. Nor does Narconon need to have specific findings from its corporate board to know
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4

what its own treatment program contains. Furthermore, in contrast to Narconons assertions, this is certainly not the only time that Plaintiffs have made allegations like the ones in this case about the Narconon program. For example, Plaintiffs in Voiculescu v. Narconon Fresh Start, Case No. 37-2014-00002635-CU-BCNC, Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego, North County, have likewise alleged that Narconon was attempting to use its treatment program to indoctrinate the teachings of Scientology. Attached as Exhibit A, Complaint from Voiculescu v. Narconon Fresh Start, at 18. Similarly, in Murphy v. Narconon of Oklahoma, Inc., Case No. CJ-2012-265, District Court In and For Pittsburgh County, State of Oklahoma, Plaintiffs in a wrongful death case alleged that Narconon was relying exclusively on the written technology of L. Ron Hubbard and using Training Routines, but that students in the Narconon program did not receive any counseling in drug rehabilitation. Attached as Exhibit B, Complaint from Murphy v. Narconon of Oklahoma, Inc., at 18 28. In addition, this Court has held that a defendant must answer allegations in a Complaint even where the defendant contends the allegations call for legal conclusions. Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Frank, 2:11-CV-1366 JCM CWH, 2012 WL 3230559, *3 (D. Nev. Aug. 6, 2012)(Mahan, J.). If a defendant is required to answer allegations in that situation, surely Narconon is required to answer basic allegations about the contents of its own program. Turning again to some of the specific allegations in Plaintiffs Complaint, it is plain that Narconon was required to answer the allegations. (For brevitys sake, Plaintiffs will not analyze each paragraph at issue.) Narconons sham pleas of ignorance warrant relief.

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 5 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Paragraph 17: The contract Narconon had Plaintiffs sign represents that a man named William Benitez created the Narconon Program after being inspired by the L. Ron Hubbard book, The Fundamentals of Thought. (Doc. 1, Ex. A). In paragraph 17 Plaintiffs allege that Narconon misrepresented the books title to conceal the programs roots in the Scientology religion: To hide Narconons origin in Scientoloy [sic], Narconon misrepresented the title of the L. Ron Hubbard book that inspired its creation. The actual title of the L. Ron Hubbard Book is Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought, The Basic Book of the Theory and Practice of Scientology for Beginners, (hereafter Scientology: Fundamentals of Thought). In Narconons Opposition, Narconon appears to admit that the title of the book is precisely what Plaintiffs allege as Narconon asserts the title of a book speaks for itself. Opposition at 10 11.

10

But Plaintiffs are making a specific factual allegation about which book inspired the Narconon
11

programs creation. This is significant because, as Plaintiffs allege in their Complaint, concepts
12

and doctrines in Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought1 are found throughout the
13

Narconon program materials.

14

And although Narconon may deny that it was hiding the name of the book that inspired its
15

creation, Narconon surely is required to admit or deny Plaintiffs allegation as to the books title.
16

Narconon undoubtedly has knowledge of the book that it cites in contracts as inspiring its
17

program.
18

Paragraph 35: In paragraph 35, Plaintiffs allege basic facts about the Narconon
19

programs written materials to provide the Court with context about their claims. Plaintiffs make
20

these allegations based on Jack Welchs experience in the program. Paragraph 35 provides:
21 22 23 24
1

Instead, patients in the Narconon program study eight books written by L. Ron Hubbard. Patients spend hours most days performing Training Routines contained within the books. Narconon and the

25

The Church of Scientology, on its website, describes this book as being [d]esignated by L. Ron Hubbard as the Book One of Scientology. (emphasis in original). http://www.scientology.org/books/catalog/beginning-books/product.html 5

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 6 of 9 Church of Scientology refer to the books as technology or study technology. Incredibly, Narconon claims it cannot respond as to whether patients in its program study eight books by L. Ron Hubbard and perform the Training Routines found in those books. This is so basic it is akin to Google claiming it lacks knowledge as to whether it conducts Internet searches. Paragraph 40: Likewise, in paragraph 40, Plaintiffs allege what Narconon has patients
6

1 2 3 4 5

like Jack Welch do in its program:

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

The books or technology use numerous Training Routines (TRs) as teaching tools. TRs are drills or exercises routinely used in Scientology. Narconon students and Scientology practitioners perform these TRs in pairs known as twins. Narconon staff members supervise the twins to ensure the TRs are conducted properly. Plaintiffs allege these facts not only to provide context for their claims, but also because Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) and Twombly require that Plaintiffs plead fraud with particularity and set forth sufficient facts to establish the plausibility of their claims, respectively. And, of course, Defendant is only required to respond as to allegations made about Narconon, not as to allegations relating to the Church of Scientology. Paragraph 42: In paragraph 42, Plaintiffs describe a Training Routine (TR 3 from Book 1 of the Narconon program) that Plaintiffs allege Narconon is using to teach a Scientology concept known as the Cycle of Communication: To execute TR 3, one student or twin asks the other twin either: (a) Do birds fly? or (b) Do Fish Swim? The other twin must answer the question. The supervisor or coach attempts to disrupt the communication between the twins. TR 3, like other TRs, goes on for hours. Narconon had Plaintiff Jack Welch perform this Training Routine as treatment. Plaintiffs allege Narconon harmed Jack by having him perform Training Routines to teach him about Scientology instead of providing him the extensive counseling Plaintiffs were promised. As such, Plaintiffs allegations plainly are proper and Narconon is required to respond to them.
6

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 7 of 9 Paragraph 43: Similarly, in paragraph 43, Plaintiffs describe and quote a Training
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Routine (TR 8) from Book 1 of the Narconon program in which Narconon has patients yell at and command an ashtray: In TR 8 of Book 1 of the Narconon program, titled Intention Without Reservation, a student and a coach sit in chairs facing another chair. The chair the student and coach are facing has an ashtray on the seat. The coach is then, according to the book, supposed to instruct the student as follows: First, locate the space which includes himself and the ashtray but not more than that much. Second, have him locate the object in that space. Third, have him [the student] command the object [the ashtray] in the loudest possible voice he can muster. This is called shouting. Plaintiffs, again, merely allege what Narconons program contains and, more importantly, how Narconon purported to treat Jack Welch. Paragraph 50: In paragraph 50, Plaintiffs allege that Narconon is inculcating the

12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Scientology doctrine of The Eight Dynamics of Existence: The Narconon program has students demonstrate their understanding of each Dynamic by instructing the students to create clay sculptures depicting each Dynamic. There is no question Narconon knows whether its program has students such as Jack Welch create clay sculptures depicting the Eight Dynamics. CONCLUSION

19

Narconons claim of ignorance about its own treatment program is a sham. The Court
20

should deem admitted Narconons responses to the paragraphs in Plaintiffs Complaint listed
21

below. The allegations in those paragraphs relate to information that is necessarily within
22

Narconons personal knowledge. Alternatively, the Court should require Narconon to re-plead its
23

responses in its Answer so that they comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8.

24 25 7

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 8 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for the following relief: 1. That paragraphs 17, 35, 37, 39, 40, 42, 43, 50, 51, 52, 55, 58, and 67 of

Plaintiffs Complaint be deemed admitted; 2. That the Court issue an Order requiring Defendant to fulfill its obligations

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(2); 3. For all other just and proper relief.

DATED this 16th of April, 2014. Respectfully submitted,

By:_/s/Ryan A. Hamilton___________
11

RYAN A. HAMILTON, ESQ.

12

Attorney for Plaintiffs

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8

Case 2:14-cv-00167-JCM-CWH Document 14 Filed 04/16/14 Page 9 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I am an employee of Hamilton Law, LLC, and that on the 16th day of April, 2014, I caused a copy of the foregoing Reply In Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Certain Responses to the Complaint to Be Deemed Admitted and to Require Defendant to Fulfill Its Obligations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(2) to be served via the CM/ECF electronic system to all parties on the service list: S. Brent Vogel Alayne M. Opie LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH, LLP 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Ste. 600 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 /s/Ryan A. Hamilton