Legacy Group Lending, Inc. et al v. W.J. Bradley Mortgage Capital, LLC

Filing 22

MINUTE ORDER denying as moot 15 Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a) and 12(b)(6) by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 7/8/14.(dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01486-KLM
LEGACY GROUP LENDING, INC., a Washington corporation, and
LEGACY GROUP HOLDINGS INC., a Washington corporation,
Plaintiffs,
v.
W.J. BRADLEY MORTGAGE CAPITAL, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a) and 12(b)(6) [#15] (the “Motion”). On July 3, 2014, Plaintiffs timely filed
an Amended Complaint [#19] in response to the Motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#15] is DENIED as moot. See, e.g.,
Strich v. United States, No. 09-cv-01913-REB-KLM, 2010 WL 14826, at *1 (D. Colo. Jan.
11, 2010) (citations omitted) (“The filing of an amended complaint moots a motion to
dismiss directed at the complaint that is supplanted and superseded.”); AJB Props., Ltd.
v. Zarda Bar-B-Q of Lenexa, LLC, No. 09-2021-JWL, 2009 WL 1140185, at *1 (D. Kan.
April 28, 2009) (finding that amended complaint superseded original complaint and
“accordingly, defendant’s motion to dismiss the original complaint is denied as moot”);
Gotfredson v. Larsen LP, 432 F.Supp.2d 1163, 1172 (D. Colo. 2006) (noting that
defendants’ motions to dismiss are “technically moot because they are directed at a
pleading that is no longer operative”).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall answer or otherwise respond to
Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint [#19] in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(3).
Dated: July 8, 2014