1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHALA MALEK, Case No.: 24cv2076-LL-BLM

12 Plaintiff, ORDER: 13 v. GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR 14 VALENTIA APARTMENTS, LLC; LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED SHEA PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT 15 COMPLAINT [ECF No. 17]; COMPANY, INC.; and DANIELLE

16 HARRIS, ACCEPTING FIRST AMENDED 17 Defendants. COMPLAINT AS OPERATIVE [ECF No. 18]; AND 18

19 DENYING AS MOOT ALL OTHER PRIOR MOTIONS [ECF Nos. 3, 14] 20

21 On March 4, 2025, the parties jointly moved for Plaintiff’s leave to file a First 22 Amended Complaint (“FAC”). ECF No. 17. On March 10, 2025, Plaintiff filed the FAC, 23 which has thirty-five more allegations and three more claims than the original complaint. 24 Compare ECF No. 1 with ECF No. 18. Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the 25 parties’ request and ACCEPTS the newly-filed FAC as operative. ECF No. 18. By March 26 31, 2025, Defendants must file their response to the FAC. 27 All other prior motions, that is Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and 28 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 3, 14), being based on the now-inoperative 1 complaint, are DENIED AS MOOT. See O. L. v. City of El Monte, No. 20-cv-0797-RGK 2 || (JDE),

, at *2—3 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2020) (denying as moot motion for 3 || preliminary injunction and motion to dismiss based on prior complaint when accepting new 4 “operative” complaint); Perrin Bernard Supowitz, LLC v. Morales, No. 22-cv-2120-ODW 5 || (JEMx),

, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2022) (denying as moot motion for 6 || preliminary injunction based on “now-inoperative” complaint when the plaintiff amended 7 complaint with “new allegations and claims”). 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 ||Dated: March 12, 2025 NO 10 Qe | 11 Honorable Linda Lopez United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28