Doe 1 v. Boulder Valley School District No. RE-2, 523 F. App'x 514

High school teacher Travis Masse engaged in sexual misconduct with underage female students: explicit texts, soliciting nude photos, and persuading students to have sex.
Three students (plaintiffs) sued Masse, Boulder Valley School District (BVSD), school supervisors (superintendent, principal, assistant principal/athletic director), and other employees under Title IX, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Colorado mandatory child-abuse reporting statute (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-3-304).
Defendants (except Masse) moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6); the district court applied Twombly/Iqbal standards and dismissed most claims for failure to state a plausible claim.
The district court allowed only the § 1983 claim against Masse and a § 19-3-304 claim against another school employee to proceed; other claims were dismissed.
Plaintiffs appealed; the Tenth Circuit initially abated the appeal but then exercised jurisdiction after a Rule 54(b) entry of final judgment on the dismissal order.
The Tenth Circuit reviewed the record (noting plaintiffs’ inadequate appendix) and affirmed the district court’s dismissal for the reasons stated in that order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether amended complaint plausibly states Title IX claims against BVSD and supervisors	Plaintiffs alleged school actors knew/should have known and were deliberately indifferent to teacher’s misconduct	Defendants argued allegations are insufficiently factual to show deliberate indifference or liability under Twombly/Iqbal	Dismissed: allegations not plausible; Title IX claims fail
Whether § 1983 claims against supervisors survive	Plaintiffs contended supervisors’ actions/omissions violated constitutional rights	Defendants argued complaint lacked facts showing municipal/official liability under § 1983	Dismissed except § 1983 claim against Masse allowed to proceed
Whether Colorado mandatory child-abuse reporting statute claim was stated	Plaintiffs claimed certain school employee failed to report as required	Defendant contended statutory elements not adequately alleged	One § 19-3-304 claim survived against a school employee; others dismissed
Whether appellate record adequacy affects review	Plaintiffs provided limited appendix; argued court could still review dismissal	Defendants emphasized missing briefing and record impede review	Court noted inadequate appendix but, after review, found no reversible error and affirmed

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility standard for pleading federal claims)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (requirement that complaints plead factual matter to state plausible claims)
McBeth v. Himes, 598 F.3d 708 (10th Cir. 2010) (Rule 54(b) entry can render partial dismissals immediately appealable)
Commonwealth Prop. Advocates, LLC v. Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 680 F.3d 1194 (10th Cir. 2011) (Rule 12(b)(6) review accepts well-pleaded facts as true)
Travelers Indem. Co. v. Accurate Autobody, Inc., 340 F.3d 1118 (10th Cir. 2003) (appellants must provide adequate record on appeal)
Burnett v. Southwestern Bell Tel., L.P., 555 F.3d 906 (10th Cir. 2009) (inadequate appendix impedes determination of preserved appellate issues)
Questar Pipeline Co. v. Grynberg, 201 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2000) (reluctance to overturn absent complete record)