Bettini v. United States

*757OPINION

NETTESHEIM, Judge.

This case is before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to RUSCC 12(b)(1), (4) on the grounds that subject matter jurisdiction is lacking and that the complaint fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted. The parties declined oral argument.

FACTS

For purposes of a motion under RUSCC 12(b)(4), all facts alleged by plaintiff will be regarded as established, Adams v. United States, 3 Cl.Ct. 696, 697 (1983) (NETTESH-EIM, J.), a presumption that does not apply to the analytically distinct motion asserting lack of subject matter jurisdiction under…