Brik et al v. Maricopa, County of et al
ORDER denying as moot 13 Motion to Dismiss Party. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 12/8/2009.(NVO)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Pinkhas and Isabella Brik, husband and ) ) wife, and on behalf of Igor Brik, a ) protected adult, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) Maricopa County; Betty Adams; Joseph ) and Ava Arpaio; City of Phoenix; Jack ) and Connie Harris; Shawn and Jane Doe ) ) Henry; and Craig and Jane Doe Scott, ) ) Defendants. )
No. CV-09-1758-PHX-DGC ORDER
After the removal of this action (Dkt. #1), Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint (Dkt. #10). Defendant Maricopa County filed an answer and motion to dismiss. Dkt. ##13, 14. Plaintiffs then sought leave to file a second amended complaint in order to address the issues raised by the motion to dismiss. Dkt. #18. The Court granted the motion to amend as unopposed. Dkt. #24. Because a second amended complaint has been filed (Dkt. #26), the Court will deny as moot the County's motion to dismiss the first amended complaint. IT IS ORDERED that Maricopa County's motion to dismiss the first amended complaint (Dkt. ##13, 14) is denied as moot. DATED this 8th day of December, 2009.
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?