Ronald Herd v. City of Oakland et al

Filing 13

ORDER by Judge Maria-Elena James finding as moot 6 Motion to Dismiss; finding as moot 9 Motion to Dismiss (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/13/2013)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

RONALD HERD,

Case No. 13-cv-04443-MEJ (MEJ)

Plaintiff,
5
v.

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO
DISMISS AS MOOT

6
7

CITY OF OAKLAND, et al.,

Re: Dkt. Nos. 6, 9

Defendants.
8
9
Pending before the Court are Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Dkt. Nos. 6, 9. However,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

on November 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. Dkt. No. 11. Under Federal Rule

12

of Civil Procedure 15, a party may amend its pleading once “as a matter of course” within “21

13

days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f).” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Thus, as

14

no prior amended complaints have been filed, Plaintiff was entitled to file an amended complaint

15

as a matter of course under Rule 15(a). Once properly served, the amended complaint supersedes

16

the original complaint, which is treated as non-existent. Since Defendants’ motion are based on

17

Plaintiff’s original complaint, the Court hereby DENIES Defendants’ motions as moot.

18

Defendants shall file an answer or other responsive pleading within 21 days from the date of this

19

Order.

20

Plaintiff is advised that no further amendments may be made without seeking leave of

21

Court pursuant to Rule 15 and Civil Local Rule 7. Any attempt to file an amended complaint

22

without proper notice to Defendant under Civil Local Rule 7 and a court order shall be stricken.

23
24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 13, 2013
______________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge