After Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly 548 U.S. 903 (2006), the task under Rule 12(b)(6) remain essentially the same with a slightly enhanced degree of scrutiny. First, a court 'continues to take all factual allegations as true and to draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff.' Rodriguez-Ortiz, 490 F.3d at 96 (emphasis in original). Second, a court 'need not credit a complaint's bald assertions or legal conclusions.' Glassman v. Computervision Corp., 90 F.3d 617, 628 (1st Cir. 1996) (citation and internal quotation omitted). Third, a court must determine whether the complaint's factual allegations '`possess enough heft' to set forth `a plausible entitlement to relief.'' Gagliardi v. Sullivan, 513 F.3d 301, 305 (1st Cir.2008) (quoting Twombly, 127 S.Ct. at 1966-67). Finally, a court should dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim if it fails to set forth '`factual allegations, either direct or inferential, respecting each material element necessary to sustain recovery under some actionable legal theory.'' Id. (quoting Centro Medico del Turabo, Inc. v. Feliciano de Melecio, 406 F.3d 1, 6 (1st Cir.2005)).