Vandonzel v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 28

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh Denying as Moot 21 Motion to Dismiss.(lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/13/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

PAUL VANDONZEL,

13

Plaintiff,

14
15
16

v.

Case No. 17-CV-01819-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
DISMISS AS MOOT
Re: Dkt. No. 21

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC., et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

On May 17, 2017, Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMorgan”) filed a motion to

19

dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint. ECF No. 21. Plaintiff did not file an opposition to this motion to

20

dismiss. Instead, on June 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. ECF No. 27.

21

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 15(a)(1)(B), if a pleading requires a

22

responsive pleading, a party may amend the original pleading within “21 days after service of a

23

responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is

24

earlier.” Therefore, Plaintiff’s amendment on June 7, 2017 was timely.

25

An “amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-

26

existent.” Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir.1997) overruled on other

27

grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 925 (9th Cir. 2012). For this reason, after an
1

28

Case No. 17-CV-01819-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT

1

amendment, “pending motions concerning the original complaint must be denied as moot.” Hylton

2

v. Anytime Towing, 2012 WL 1019829, at *5 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2012). Therefore, the Court

3

DENIES JPMorgan’s motion to dismiss as moot.

4

Nevertheless, Plaintiff has now amended the complaint once in light of the deficiencies

5

identified in JPMorgan’s motion to dismiss. Thus, if the Court grants any future motion to dismiss

6

the amended complaint based on these deficiencies, the Court will dismiss the amended complaint

7

with prejudice.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated: June 13, 2017
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No. 17-CV-01819-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT