Opinion
Case No: 3:19-cv-01830-WQH-KSC
10-28-2019
TI, LIMITED Plaintiff, v. GRUPO VIDANTA; DANIEL CHAVEZ; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants.
ORDER
:
The matter before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2)-(6) filed by Defendant Chavez. (ECF No. 3).
On July 1, 2019, Plaintiff TI, Limited commenced this action by filing a Complaint in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Diego, assigned case number 37-2019-00034144-CU-BC-CTL, against Defendant Grupo Vidanta and Defendant Chavez. (ECF No. 1 at 1). On September 23, 2019, Defendant Chavez removed the action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b), and 28 U.S.C. § 1446. Id. at 1-3. On September 30, 2019, Defendant Chavez filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. (ECF No. 3). On October 21, 2019, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, which is the operative pleading in this case. (ECF No. 4).
Plaintiff had a right to file an Amended Complaint pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1) ("A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within ... 21 days after serving it, or ... if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.). Once filed, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint in its entirety. See London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 814 (9th Cir. 1981). Defendant Chavez's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint became moot once the Amended Complaint was filed.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Rules 12(b)(2)-(6) (ECF No. 3) is DENIED AS MOOT. Dated: October 28, 2019
/s/_________
Hon. William Q. Hayes
United States District Court