FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

PAUL D. STICKNEY, Magistrate Judge.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the district court has referred Defendant Texas Medical Board's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 134] for determination and/or recommendation. See Order of Reference [ECF No. 136]. For the following reasons, the undersigned recommends the district court DENY without prejudice as moot Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 134].

Background

On October 3, 2016, Defendant Texas Medical Board ("TMB") filed its Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 134]. On January 10, 2017, Plaintiff filed his Fourth Amended Complaint [ECF No. 171] which is now the live pleading in this case. Plaintiff was ordered by the district court to file an amended complaint in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), 8(d)(1), 9(b), and 10(b). See Order 1 [ECF No. 168]. Even assuming Defendant's motion — which is addressed to Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint — has merit, Plaintiff has superseded that pleading by filing his Fourth Amended Complaint. Additionally, at the time of its motion TMB did not have the benefit of responding to a complaint in compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See, e.g., Mangum v. United Parcel Servs., No. 3:09-CV-0385-D, 2009 WL 2700217, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 26, 2009) (denying as moot motion to dismiss after plaintiff filed amended complaint).1

RECOMMENDATION

In light of the filing of Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint, the undersigned respectfully recommends that Defendant Texas Medical Board's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 134] be DENIED without prejudice as moot.

SO RECOMMENDED.