BROCK v. AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION, 16cv646-WQH-WVG. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160520a13
Visitors: 7
Filed: May 19, 2016
Latest Update: May 19, 2016
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM Q. HAYES , District Judge . The matter before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Bank of America N.A. on April 11, 2016. (ECF No. 12). On May 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 225), as was her right pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) ("A party may amend the party's pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served . . . ."); see also Rick-Mik Enters. v
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM Q. HAYES , District Judge . The matter before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Bank of America N.A. on April 11, 2016. (ECF No. 12). On May 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 225), as was her right pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) ("A party may amend the party's pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served . . . ."); see also Rick-Mik Enters. v...
More
ORDER
WILLIAM Q. HAYES, District Judge.
The matter before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Bank of America N.A. on April 11, 2016. (ECF No. 12).
On May 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 225), as was her right pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) ("A party may amend the party's pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served . . . ."); see also Rick-Mik Enters. v. Equilon Enters., LLC, 532 F.3d 963, 977 (9th Cir. 2008) ("A motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading within the meaning of Rule 15(a)."). Once filed, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint in its entirety. See London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 814 (9th Cir. 1981), overruled on other grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012). Defendant's motion to dismiss, addressing the original Complaint, became moot once the First Amended Complaint was filed.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 12) is denied as moot.
Source: Leagle
