Summary
recognizing that an "amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and is the 'legally operative complaint'" upon filing
Summary of this case from White v. KasichOpinion
Case Number: 1:06cv160.
September 27, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Timothy S. Hogan. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on July 25, 2006 Report and Recommendations (Doc. 50). Subsequently, the Plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendations (Doc. 51).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Recommendations should be adopted.
Accordingly, Defendant Thomas P. Charles' Motion to Dismiss the original Complaint (Doc. 24), Defendant Tracey Callahan's Motion to Dismiss the original Complaint (Doc. 30) and the properly-served ODRC Defendants' Motion to Dsmiss the Original Complaint (Doc. 32) are DENIED as moot.
Defendant Callahan's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint in lieu of answer to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (Doc. 40) is GRANTED. The Plaintiffs' federal law claims against Defendant Callahan is DISMISSED with prejudice and Plaintiffs' state law claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.
Defendant Charles' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (Doc. 43) is GRANTED and Plaintiffs' federal law claims against Defendant Charles are DISMISSED with prejudice and Plaintiffs' state law claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.