Dahlstrom v. Inslee

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE RAJU A.T. DAHLSTROM, CASE NO. 2:25-cv-262-JNW Plaintiff, ORDER v. JAY ROBERT INSLEE, STATE OF 11 WASHINGTON, WASHINGTON STATE PATROL, CHRISTOPHER 12 JOHN DAIGLE, CASEY K. COREY, JEFFERSON COUNTY, MICHAEL E.

13 HAAS, SCOTT W. ROSEKRANS, WALTER H. PERRY, THOMAS A.

14 BROTHERTON, JAMES MITCHELL KENNEDY, JILL LANDES, KEITH 15 CHANDLER HARPER, 16 Defendants.

The Court raises this matter on its own accord. On February 18, 2025, Defendants United States of America, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), United States Customs and Border Protection (CPB), United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Jay Robert Inslee, State of Washington, Washington State Patrol, Christopher John Daigle, and Casey K. Corey moved to dismiss Plaintiff Raju A.T.

2 Dahlstrom’s complaint. Dkt. Nos. 10, 11.

3 On March 3, 2025, Dahlstrom filed an Amended Complaint. Dkt. No. 25.

4 Because Dahlstrom filed less than 21 days after Defendants moved to dismiss, he did not need to obtain leave from the Court or Defendants to amend his complaint.

6 Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B) (“A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course no later than . . . 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b)[.]”).

8 Generally, “an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and renders it without legal effect.” Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012).

10 “‘Courts often apply this rule to motions to dismiss a complaint that has since been superseded and deny such motions as moot.’” Dahlstrom v. Life Care Centers of Am., Inc., No. 2:21-CV-01465-JHC, 2022 WL 7631419, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 13, 2022) (quoting Bisson v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. C12-0995-JLR, 2012 WL 5866309, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 16, 2012)). Dahlstrom’s Amended Complaint supersedes the original complaint and is now the operative complaint here.

16 Accordingly, the Court STRIKES as moot the pending motions to dismiss, Dkt. Nos. 10, 11. Defendants United States of America, DHS, ICE, CBP, and USCIS are no longer party to this action subject to Dahlstrom’s voluntary notices of dismissal. Dkt. No. 20–24. Remaining Defendants Inslee, State of Washington, Washington State Patrol, Christopher John Daigle, and Casey K. Corey may refile their motion to dismiss, but only if it is directed at the Amended Complaint.

1 Dated this 10th day of March, 2025.

A Jamal N. Whitehead 4 United States District Judge