Filed: Apr. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 16, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO VACATE MAY 10, 2019 HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS MOOT Re: Dkt. Nos. 29, 49, 53, 65 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Four defendants (Atlas Systems, Inc., Telephone Man of America LLC, Dedicated Business Systems, International LLC, and Jason Hines) have filed motions to dismiss the original complaint. On April 5, 2019, plaintiff filed an amended complaint in lieu of opposing the mo
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO VACATE MAY 10, 2019 HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS MOOT Re: Dkt. Nos. 29, 49, 53, 65 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Four defendants (Atlas Systems, Inc., Telephone Man of America LLC, Dedicated Business Systems, International LLC, and Jason Hines) have filed motions to dismiss the original complaint. On April 5, 2019, plaintiff filed an amended complaint in lieu of opposing the mot..
More
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO VACATE MAY 10, 2019 HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS MOOT
Re: Dkt. Nos. 29, 49, 53, 65
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
Four defendants (Atlas Systems, Inc., Telephone Man of America LLC, Dedicated Business Systems, International LLC, and Jason Hines) have filed motions to dismiss the original complaint. On April 5, 2019, plaintiff filed an amended complaint in lieu of opposing the motions. Since that date, the Court's clerk has inquired whether defendants would withdraw their motions and received no response.
On April 11, 2019, plaintiff filed an administrative motion requesting that the Court vacate the May 10, 2019 hearing on the motions to dismiss on the ground that the motions have been mooted by the filing of the amended complaint. Defendants' response to the administrative motion was due April 15, 2019; defendants did not file anything.
The Court agrees with plaintiff that the amended complaint moots the motions to dismiss. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS plaintiff's administrative motion and DENIES the pending motions to dismiss the complaint as moot. The amended complaint does not moot the pending motion to lift the stay with regard to defendant Pearce, and thus that motion remains scheduled for a hearing on May 10, 2019. Dkt. No. 48.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
