Stinnett v. Bismark Antonio Garcia
Stinnett v. Bismark Antonio Garcia
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA JOHNETTA STINNETT, ) Plaintiff, Case No. CIV-21-01105-JD BISMARK ANTONIO GARCIA doing business as B Garcia Truckin; ) and JUAN INFANTE, ) Defendants. ORDER Before the Court is Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss (“Motion”). [Doc. No. 7). Plaintiff then filed an Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). [See Doc. No. 16; see also Doc. No. 17]. Plaintiff’s amendment “supersedes the original and renders it of no legal effect.” Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp.,
929 F.2d 1515, 1517(10th Cir. 1991); see Predator Int’l, Inc. v. Gamo Outdoor USA, Inc.,
793 F.3d 1177, 1180-81(10th Cir. 2015); Mink v. Suthers,
482 F.3d 1244, 1254(10th Cir. 2007). Thus, the Motion is moot. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 7] is DENIED as moot and without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of January 2022.
pe lek forte _ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown