Achal v. Gate Gourmet, Inc.

Filing 13

Order by Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero denying as moot 8 Motion to Dismiss. (jcslc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/22/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
ANDREW ACHAL,

7

Case No. 15-cv-01570-JCS

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION
TO DISMISS

9
GATE GOURMET, INC.,

10

Re: Dkt. No. 8

Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
After removing to this Court, Defendant Gate Gourmet, Inc. moved to dismiss Plaintiff

12
13

Andrew Achal’s Complaint. Mot. to Dismiss (dkt. 8). Plaintiff has since filed a First Amended

14

Complaint (“FAC,” dkt. 11). The Court finds Defendant’s Motion suitable for disposition without

15

oral argument and vacates the hearing scheduled for June 12, 2015. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b).
“[T]he general rule is that an amended complaint supercedes the original complaint and

16
17

renders it without legal effect . . . .” Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012)

18

(en banc). Accordingly, “[d]ismissal of the superseded original complaint would not alter the

19

proceedings . . . as the parties would continue to litigate the merits of the claims contained in the

20

now-operative First Amended Complaint.” See Liberi v. Defend Our Freedoms Founds., Inc., 509

21

F. App’x 595, 596 (9th Cir. 2013) (dismissing as moot appeal of denial of an anti-SLAPP motion

22

regarding a superseded complaint). The Court therefore DENIES AS MOOT Defendant’s

23

Motion.1 If Defendant wishes to challenge Plaintiff’s FAC, Defendant may file a new motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25

Dated: April 22, 2015

26

______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
Chief Magistrate Judge

27
1

28

The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for all
purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).