Jones v. Hartsel Fire Protection District et al

Filing 19

MINUTE ORDER. Defendants' 12 , 14 Motions to Dismiss are denied as moot. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 10/5/11.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01847-PAB-CBS
TIMOTHY JONES
Plaintiff,
v.
HARTSEL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, a Colorado quasi-municipal organization,
its board of directors,
HERBERT M. BURTON, in his official capacity,
SUSAN E. JONES, in her official capacity,
LINDA S. BJORKLUND, in her official capacity,
JEFFREY O. WINTER, in his official capacity,
WILLIAM H. SCHWARTZKOPF, in his official capacity, and
JACK ALBERT HUTCHESON, Jr., Fire Chief, Hartsel Fire Protection District,
in his individual capacity,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Judge Philip A. Brimmer
This matter is before the Court on defendant Jack A. Hutcheson, Jr.’s Motion to
Dismiss [Docket No. 12] and defendants Hartsel Fire Protection District, Herbert M.
Burton, Susan E. Jones, Linda S. Bjorklund and Jeffrey O. Winter’s Motion to Dismiss
[Docket No. 14]. On October 4, 2011, plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint [Docket
No. 18] as a matter of course pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). Thus, the Amended
Complaint became the operative pleading in this action, and the Motions to Dismiss
[Docket Nos. 12 and 14] are directed to an inoperative, superseded pleading. See,
e.g., Gilles v. United States, 906 F.2d 1386, 1389 (10th Cir. 1990) (“a pleading that has
been amended under Rule 15(a) supersedes the pleading it modifies”) (internal
quotation marks omitted). As such, the motions to dismiss are moot. It is
ORDERED that defendants’ Motions to Dismiss [Docket Nos. 12 and 14] are
DENIED as moot.
DATED October 5, 2011.