Hadrovic v. Braun

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ZLATKO HADROVIC, CASE NO. C25-0872-KKE 7 Plaintiff(s), ORDER DENYING PENDING MOTIONS v. AS MOOT MARY BRAUN, et al., Defendant(s).

Certain Defendants filed motions to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim, before Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, evinced an intent to amend the complaint. Dkt. Nos. 12, 13, 16, 20. The Court thereafter granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint, which Plaintiff did. Dkt. Nos. 21, 24. As Defendants’ motions to dismiss now pertain to a prior version of the operative complaint, the Court DENIES the motions (Dkt. Nos. 12, 13, 16) as moot, subject to re-filing with respect to the operative complaint. Because Plaintiff’s motion to remand is also directed at a prior version of the complaint, Plaintiff’s pending motion to remand (Dkt. No. 19) is likewise DENIED as moot, subject to re-filing with respect to the operative complaint. See, e.g., Gray v. City of Roseville, No. 2:25-cv-0535-TLN-JDP (PS), 2025 WL 1014690, at *1 n.1 (E.D.

Cal. Apr. 4, 2025).

Dated this 30th day of June, 2025.

A Kymberly K. Evanson United States District Judge