Huang v. Genesis Glob. Hardware, Inc.

Full title: XIAOHUA HUANG, Plaintiff, v. GENESIS GLOBAL HARDWARE, INC., Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 27, 2020

No. 2:20-cv-1713-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Oct. 27, 2020)

Opinion

No. 2:20-cv-1713-JAM-KJN PS

10-27-2020

XIAOHUA HUANG, Plaintiff, v. GENESIS GLOBAL HARDWARE, INC., Defendant.

KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT

(ECF No. 8, 11.)

Plaintiff filed an action against defendant on August 27, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) On October 15, defendant filed a motion to dismiss and set it for a November 12, 2020 hearing. (ECF No. 8.) On October 23, plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (ECF No. 10.)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) allows for a complaint to be amended "once as a matter of course within . . . 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b) . . . ."). This amendment as a matter of course renders an original complaint null, thereby mooting defendants' motion to dismiss. Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) ("[W]hen a plaintiff files an amended complaint, the amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent."); see also TI, Ltd. v. Grupo Vidanta, 2019 WL 5556127, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2019) ("[Defendant's] Motion to Dismiss the Complaint became moot once the Amended Complaint was filed."); Bhatti v. Goldman, 2014 WL 5089381, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2014) (same); Rector v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 2014 WL 12570878, at *1 (E.D. Cal. May 30, 2014) (same); Krieger v. Atheros Commc'ns, Inc.,2011 WL 2550831, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 25, 2011) (same). Thus, the court denies defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8.) as moot.

Further, plaintiff filed a "request to file under seal," seeking to have his original complaint placed under seal. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff states no compelling reason for doing so. Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2009); see also E.D. Cal. R. 141.1(a)(1) ("All information provided to the Court in a specific action is presumptively public, but may be sealed in conformance with L.R. 141."); E.D. Cal. R. 141(a) ("Documents may be sealed only by written order of the Court, upon the showing required by applicable law.").

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant's pending motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot;

2. The hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss is VACATED; and

3. Plaintiff's request to seal is DENIED.

Dated: October 27, 2020

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE huan.1713