Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

VANESSA FUCHS and BETHANY FUCHS, a child through her next friend VANESSA FUCHS, Plaintiffs, v. ANTHONY SANDERS, Defendant.

ORDER

PHILIP BRIMMER, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Bethany Fuchs' Complaint [Docket No. 7] filed on May 9, 2008. Plaintiffs responded to the motion to dismiss on June 6, 2008 [Docket No. 15] and filed an Amended Complaint and Jury Demand ("Amended Complaint") [Docket No. 16] contemporaneously. Plaintiff then sought leave of the Court to file its Amended Complaint, which Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix granted on June 16, 2008 [Docket No. 19]. Thus, as of June 16, 2008, the operative pleading was the Amended Complaint. Defendant's motion to dismiss is therefore directed to an inoperative, superseded pleading. See, e.g., Gilles v. United States, 906 F.2d 1386, 1389 (10th Cir. 1990) ("[A] pleading that has been amended under Rule 15(a) supersedes the pleading it modifies. . . .") (internal quotation marks omitted). As such, the motion to dismiss is moot.

Therefore, it is

ORDERED that the motion to dismiss [Docket No. 7] is Denied as moot.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

FUCHS v. SANDERS
(Jan 5, 2009)