Rothman v. U.S. Bank National Association et al

Filing 25

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 28, 2013. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

MARSHAL ROTHMAN,
No. C 13-3381 MMC
Plaintiff,

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
v.
11
12
13

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION &
OLD REPUBLIC DIVERSIFIED SERVICES,
INC. d/b/a OLD REPUBLIC DEFAULT
MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
Defendants.

14

/

15
16
17
18

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Before the Court is defendant U.S. Bank National Association’s motion to dismiss,
filed August 13, 2013. On August 28, 2013, plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint.
A party may amend a pleading “once as a matter of course at any time before a

19

responsive pleading is served.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).1 “[A]n amended complaint

20

supercedes the original complaint and renders it without legal effect . . . .” Lacey v.

21

Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012).

22

Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES as moot defendant’s motion to dismiss.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25

Dated: August 28, 2013
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

26
27
28

1

A motion to dismiss is not a “responsive pleading.” See Crum v. Circus Circus
Enterprises, 231 F. 3d 1129, 1130 n. 3 (9th Cir. 2000).