Beal v. Green Rush Group, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JORDAN BEAL, individually and on Case No.: 20-cv-2195-MMA (BGS) behalf of all others similarly situated,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff, AS MOOT v. [Doc. No. 6]

GREEN RUSH GROUP, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Jordan Beal (“Plaintiff”) brings this putative class action against Green Rush Group, Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq. (“TCPA”). See Doc. No. 1. On April 23, 2021, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s TCPA claims. See Doc. No. 6. On April 26, 2021, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint in lieu of a response to the pending motion to dismiss. See Doc. No. 7.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), a party may amend its pleading “as a matter of course . . . 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b).” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is timely filed under the rule and supersedes the original complaint. As such, the complaint which Defendant moves to dismiss is no longer an operative pleading in this action. See Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997); King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987). Because Defendant seeks dismissal of an inoperative complaint, the pending motion to dismiss the TCPA claims contained therein is now moot.

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to dismiss without prejudice MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 26, 2021 g Mite MU - Ld oles HON. MICHAEL M. ANELLO United States District Judge