Wagner v. Terumo Medical Corporation, 18cv1007-MMA (JLB). (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180918b69
Visitors: 30
Filed: Sep. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 17, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT [Doc. No. 8] MICHAEL M. ANELLO , District Judge . On August 30, 2018, Defendant Terumo Medical Corporation ("Defendant") filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Regina Marie Wagner's ("Plaintiff") Complaint. See Doc. No. 8. On September 17, 2018, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). 1 See Doc. No. 9. Accordingly, the complaint which Defendant seeks to dismiss is no longer the operative pleading in this
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT [Doc. No. 8] MICHAEL M. ANELLO , District Judge . On August 30, 2018, Defendant Terumo Medical Corporation ("Defendant") filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Regina Marie Wagner's ("Plaintiff") Complaint. See Doc. No. 8. On September 17, 2018, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). 1 See Doc. No. 9. Accordingly, the complaint which Defendant seeks to dismiss is no longer the operative pleading in this ..
More
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT
[Doc. No. 8]
MICHAEL M. ANELLO, District Judge.
On August 30, 2018, Defendant Terumo Medical Corporation ("Defendant") filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Regina Marie Wagner's ("Plaintiff") Complaint. See Doc. No. 8. On September 17, 2018, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC").1 See Doc. No. 9. Accordingly, the complaint which Defendant seeks to dismiss is no longer the operative pleading in this action, as an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Ramirez v. Cnty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927-28 (9th Cir. 2012)). As such, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. No. 8).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1), "[a] party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within . . . 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b). . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). Because Plaintiff amended her pleading within 21 days after service of Defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6), Plaintiff's FAC is timely.
Source: Leagle
