1 2

3

4 5 6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 ALEXIS ANN BARNABA, as guardian Case No.: 23-cv-01622-AJB-SBC ad litem for minor child and successor-in 12 -interest A.N.Y.; and YVETTE YOUNG, ORDER: 13 Plaintiffs, (1) DISMISSING MIKE BARNETT 14 BY OPERATION OF THE THIRD 15 v. AMENDED COMPLAINT;

16 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., (2) DENYING AS MOOT MIKE 17 BARNETT’S MOTION TO DISMISS; Defendants. AND 18

19 (3) TERMINATING MIKE BARNETT FROM THE ACTION. 20

21 (Doc. No. 42)

22 23 In response to the Court’s July 24, 2025 Order, Plaintiffs filed a Third Amended 24 Complaint (“TAC”) against “COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, KELLY MARTINEZ, 25 THERESA ADAMS-HYDAR, WILLIAM GORE, ERIKA FRIERSON and DOES 1 26 through 6, inclusive.” (Doc. No. 51 at 1.) “As a general rule, when a plaintiff files an 27 amended complaint, the amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated 28 thereafter as non-existent.” Rhodes v. Robinson,

, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) 1 || Gnternal quotation marks and alterations omitted). 2 Because Plaintiffs no longer name Mike Barnett (“Barnett”) as a defendant in 3 operative TAC, the Court DISMISSES Barnett from this action and DENIES AS 4 || MOOT his pending motion to dismiss, (Doc. No. 42). See id. Accordingly, the Clerk of 5 || Court is DIRECTED to update the docket to reflect that Barnett has been terminated from 6 || this action. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 ||Dated: August 4, 2025

10 United States District Judge 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

45