From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Veris Gold USA Inc. v. Heyl & Patterson, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Feb 25, 2013
3:13-cv-00009-HDM-VPC (D. Nev. Feb. 25, 2013)

Opinion

3:13-cv-00009-HDM-VPC

02-25-2013

VERIS GOLD USA INC., Plaintiff, v. HEYL & PATTERSON, INC., and DOES 1-10, Defendants.


ORDER

On January 25, 2013, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim for consequential damages (#13). On February 5, 2013, plaintiff filed a second amended complaint removing from the body of the complaint the language that related to consequential damages. Plaintiff's amended complaint supersedes plaintiff's original complaint. Dichter-Mad Family Partners, LLP v. United States, - F.3d -, 2013 WL 501648 (9th Cir. Feb. 12, 2013). Accordingly, defendant's motion to dismiss (#13) is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Veris Gold USA Inc. v. Heyl & Patterson, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Feb 25, 2013
3:13-cv-00009-HDM-VPC (D. Nev. Feb. 25, 2013)
Case details for

Veris Gold USA Inc. v. Heyl & Patterson, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:VERIS GOLD USA INC., Plaintiff, v. HEYL & PATTERSON, INC., and DOES 1-10…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Feb 25, 2013

Citations

3:13-cv-00009-HDM-VPC (D. Nev. Feb. 25, 2013)