BARNER v. THOMPSON/CENTER ARMS COMPANY, INC., 4:14-cv-00090-SWW. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20140402726
Visitors: 12
Filed: Apr. 01, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 01, 2014
Summary: ORDER SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, District Judge. On March 7, 2014, defendants Thompson/Center Arms Company, Inc. and Thompson/Center Arms Company, LLC filed a motion [doc.#10] to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint. Subsequently, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint [doc.#19]. As "[i]t is well-established that an amended complaint supercedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect," In re Wireless Tel. Fed. Cost Recovery Fees Litig., 396 F.3d 922 , 928 (8
Summary: ORDER SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, District Judge. On March 7, 2014, defendants Thompson/Center Arms Company, Inc. and Thompson/Center Arms Company, LLC filed a motion [doc.#10] to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint. Subsequently, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint [doc.#19]. As "[i]t is well-established that an amended complaint supercedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect," In re Wireless Tel. Fed. Cost Recovery Fees Litig., 396 F.3d 922 , 928 (8 t..
More
ORDER
SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, District Judge.
On March 7, 2014, defendants Thompson/Center Arms Company, Inc. and Thompson/Center Arms Company, LLC filed a motion [doc.#10] to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint. Subsequently, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint [doc.#19]. As "[i]t is well-established that an amended complaint supercedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect," In re Wireless Tel. Fed. Cost Recovery Fees Litig., 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005), defendants' motion to dismiss is denied without prejudice as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
