Matthews et al v. Ankor Energy, LLC, et al.

Filing 19

ORDER denying as moot 10 Motion to Dismiss & the 11 Motion to Dismiss; granting 15 Motion to Amend Complaint as set out. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sonja F. Bivins on 5/1/2017. Copies to parties. (mpp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION HOOPER W. MATTHEWS, III, et al.,: : Plaintiffs, : : vs. : : ANKOR ENERGY LLC, et al., : : Defendants. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-00062-B ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 10, 11), and Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Amend Complaint. (Doc. 15). Upon consideration, Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint is GRANTED, and the Clerk is DIRECTED to docket Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint attached to the motion to amend. (Doc. 15-1). Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 10, 11) are DENIED as moot. Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the amendments of pleadings before trial. Rule 15(a) states that a party “may amend its pleading once as a matter of course” within 21 days after serving the pleading, or, if the pleading is one in which a responsive pleading is required, within 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), 15(a)(1). or (f), whichever is earlier. Fed. R. Civ. P. “In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The decision whether to grant leave to amend a complaint is within the sole discretion of the district court. Redman Home Builders Co. v. Lewis, 513 F. Supp. 2d 1299, 1313 (S.D. Ala. 2007) (citing Laurie v. Alabama Ct. of Crim. App., 256 F.3d 1266, 1274 (11th Cir. 2001)). However, Rule 15(a) tempers the court’s discretion by directing that “leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Id. (citing Bryant v. Dupree, 252 F.3d 1161, 1163 (11th Cir. 2001)). In the instant action, Plaintiffs assert that they seek to amend their complaint in order to add more factual and jurisdictional allegations, and that counsel for Defendants undersigned do not finds oppose that their under the request. Accordingly, circumstances, the Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to amend is due to be GRANTED. Having granted Plaintiffs permission to file their amended complaint, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 10, 11) are rendered moot and, accordingly, are DENIED as moot. Pintando v. Miami-Dade Housing Agency, 501 F. 3d 1241, 1243 (llth Cir. 2007) (“As a former general matter, pleading; the [a]n amended original pleading pleading is supersedes abandoned by the the amendment, and is no longer a part of the pleader’s averments against his adversary.”)(quoting Dresdner Bank AG, Dresdner Bank AG in Hamburg v. M/V Olympia Voyager, 463 F. 3d 1210, 1215 (llth Cir. 2006)) (quotation marks omitted); see also Meterlogic, Inc. v. Copier Solutions, Inc., 185 F. Supp. 2d 1292, 1297 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (noting that the plaintiff’s 2 filing of an amended complaint “rendered moot the parties’ previous pleadings and the defendants’ summary judgment and Daubert motions.”). DONE this the 1st day of May, 2017. /s/ SONJA F. BIVINS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?