Law360, New York (March 11, 2016, 11:04 AM EST) -- Every litigator knows the standard for a motion to dismiss by heart: A plaintiff must allege sufficient facts, as opposed to legal conclusions, to "raise a right to relief above the speculative level" and push the claim "across the line from conceivable to plausible." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). This "plausibility" test is one of the most heavily cited U.S. Supreme Court passages since it was first articulated by the court in 2007. While everyone cites the same language, there is often a wide difference of opinion as to what allegations are, in fact, "plausible." In adopting this standard, the Supreme Court recognized that it would be a "context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its own judicial experience and common sense." The problem, however, is that different judges have different "experiences" and different notions of "common sense."...