IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

NANCY WILSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-24-00128-JD ) OKLAHOMA CITY HOUSING ) AUTHORITY, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Oklahoma City Housing Authority (“Motion”). [Doc. No. 4]. The Motion seeks to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Oklahoma City Housing Authority in Plaintiff’s Complaint. [Doc. No. 1]. In response to the Motion and following the parties’ conference [see Doc. No. 9], Plaintiff timely filed an Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). [See Doc. No. 8]. Plaintiff’s amendment “supersedes the original [complaint] and renders it of no legal effect.” Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp.,

(10th Cir. 1991); see Predator Int’l, Inc. v. Gamo Outdoor USA, Inc.,

, 1180–81 (10th Cir. 2015); Mink v. Suthers,

(10th Cir. 2007). Thus, the Motion is now moot. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 4] is DENIED as moot and without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of March 2024.

ei W. DISHMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE