Vuz v. DCSS III, Inc.

10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ASHLEY R. VUZ, an individual, Case No.: 3:20-cv-00246-H-AGS 14 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING AS MOOT v. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS DCSS III, INC., a California corporation dba GOSSIP GRILL, et al., 17 [Doc. No. 22.]

Defendants.

20 Currently pending before the court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (Doc. No. 22.)

21 On March 27, 2020, Defendants filed their motion to dismiss. (Id.) On April 17, 2020, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (Doc. No. 33.) “A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course . . . 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f) . . .

24 .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Plaintiff therefore had a right to file an amended complaint without leave of the court.

26 An amended complaint supersedes a prior complaint as a pleading. Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997); Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). Therefore, where a plaintiff elects to file an amended complaint, a district court may treat an existing motion to dismiss as moot.

2 The Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendants' motion to dismiss and VACATES the hearing scheduled for April 27, 2020. This order is without prejudice to Defendants moving to dismiss Plaintiff's amended complaint.

5 IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 DATED: April 20, 2020 MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT