JAMES C. DEVER, III, District Judge.
On April 18, 2018, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted or, in the alternative, to stay the proceedings under the primary jurisdiction doctrine [D.E. 21] and filed a memorandum in support [D.E. 22]. On June 29, 2018, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint [D.E. 34]. On July 31, 2018, defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs' first amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted or, in the alternative, to stay the proceedings under the primary jurisdiction doctrine [D.E. 36] and filed a memorandum in support [D.E. 37]. On August 21, 2018, plaintiffs responded in opposition [D.E. 38]. On September 14, 2018, defendants replied [D.E. 41].
In sum, the court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART defendants' motion to dismiss the first amended complaint [D.E. 36], DENIES defendants' motion to stay [D.E. 36], and DENIES as moot defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint [D.E. 21]. In due course, the court will issue, an order expounding on its conclusions.
SO ORDERED.