Altes v. Bulletproof 360, Inc., 2:19-cv-04409-ODW (SKx). (2019)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20190816857
Visitors: 11
Filed: Aug. 14, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT [22] OTIS D. WRIGHT, II , District Judge . Defendant Bulletproof 360, Inc., ("Defendant") served Plaintiff Tiffni Altes with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss in this case on July 15, 2019. (ECF No. 22.) On July 29, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Intent to File a First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on August 5, 2019—
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT [22] OTIS D. WRIGHT, II , District Judge . Defendant Bulletproof 360, Inc., ("Defendant") served Plaintiff Tiffni Altes with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss in this case on July 15, 2019. (ECF No. 22.) On July 29, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Intent to File a First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on August 5, 2019— t..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT [22]
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge.
Defendant Bulletproof 360, Inc., ("Defendant") served Plaintiff Tiffni Altes with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss in this case on July 15, 2019. (ECF No. 22.) On July 29, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Intent to File a First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on August 5, 2019— twenty-one days after Defendant filed its responsive pleading. (ECF No. 26.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1) allows Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint once as a matter of course within twenty-one days of service with a Rule 12(b) motion. Therefore, Plaintiffs' amended complaint was proper. As the pending motion to dismiss was based on a complaint that is no longer operative, the motion is DENIED as MOOT. See Ramirez v. Cty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
