Opinion
2:16-cv-00603-JAD-PAL
06-09-2016
John Lige, Plaintiff v. Clark County, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada, et al, Defendants
Order Denying Motions and Vacating Hearing
[#17, 18]
Defendant Service Employees international Union, Local 1107 moved to dismiss this action on May 2, 2016, and defendant Clark County joined in those motions to dismiss. Three weeks later, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. In plaintiff's opposition to the motion to dismiss, he argues only that the filing of the amended complaint mooted the motions to dismiss; the time to reply has passed, and defendants filed none.
ECF No. 17, 18.
ECF No. 22, 23.
ECF No. 26.
ECF No. 28.
Rule 15(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits parties to amend their complaints once as a matter of course within 21 days of a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's amended complaint was timely filed as of right. Once filed, an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading in its entirety, mooting a motion to dismiss the original pleading.
See Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997) (overruled on other grounds in Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012)). --------
Because the filing of plaintiff's amended complaint has mooted the pending motions to dismiss, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the defendants' motions to dismiss [Doc. 17, 18] are DENIED as moot and without prejudice. The June 14, 2016, hearing on those motions [ECF No. 20] is VACATED.
Dated this 9th day of June, 2016.
/s/_________
Jennifer A. Dorsey
United States District Judge