UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------X : C.D., on behalf of herself and her minor child, : J.D., : : Plaintiff, : 23-CV-7189 (VSB) : -against- : ORDER : NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF : EDUCATION, et al., : : Defendant. : --------------------------------------------------------- X

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: Plaintiff filed the complaint in this action on August 14, 2023. (Doc. 1 (“Complaint”).) On October 30, 2023, Defendants moved to dismiss the Complaint. (Doc. 8.) On November 20, 2023, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). (Doc. 13 (“Amended Complaint”).) In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), Defendants filed a new motion to dismiss on January 3, 2024. (Doc. 16.) “[W]hen a plaintiff properly amends [a] complaint after a defendant has filed a motion to dismiss that is still pending, the district court has the option of either denying the pending motion as moot or evaluating the motion in light of the facts alleged in the amended complaint.” Pettaway v. Nat’l Recovery Sols., LLC,

, 303–04 (2d Cir. 2020). Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that in light of Defendants’ January 3, 2024 motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint, Defendants’ October 30, 2023 motion to dismiss the Complaint is denied as MOOT. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the open motion at Doc. 8. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 10, 2025 New York, New York

Vernon S. Broderick United States District Judge