ORDER:

(1) GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT;

[Doc. No. 16]

(2) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AS MOOT; AND

[Doc. No. 11.]

(3) VACATING MOTION HEARING

MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge.

On September 9, 2019, Plaintiff Todd Hall filed a class action complaint against Defendant Marriott International, Inc. (Doc. No. 1.) On November 1, 2019, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint. (Doc. No. 11.) Instead of opposing Defendant's motion, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on November 22, 2019. (Doc. No. 15.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B) (permitting plaintiffs to file an amended complaint as a matter of right within "21 days after the service of a motion under Rule 12(b)"). On November 26, 2019, the parties filed a joint motion to extend the time for Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to the first amended complaint. (Doc. No. 16.) For good cause shown, the Court grants the parties' joint motion. Defendant's answer or response to the First Amended Complaint is due on or before January 10, 2020.

Because Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint supersedes his original complaint, the Court denies Defendant's motion to dismiss the original complaint as moot. See Ramirez v. County of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) ("Because the Defendants' motion to dismiss targeted the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, which was no longer in effect, we conclude that the motion to dismiss should have been deemed moot before the district court granted it."); see also Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997) (An "`amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent'"). Additionally, the Court vacates the motion hearing scheduled for December 13, 2020.

IT IS SO ORDERED.