Colby et al v. County & Herrick et al

Filing 40

MINUTE ORDER granting 37 Second Motion for Leave of Court to Re-plead and/or Amend Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 15(a), and denying as moot 36 Motion for: Substitution/Correction of Parties Pursuant to FRCP 25, Required or Permissive Joinder of Parties Under FRCP 19/20 and 23 Motion to Dismiss, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 10/16/14.(dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01860-MSK-KLM
SUMMER R. COLBY, and
JAMES R. COLBY,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DISTRICT COURT OF FREMONT COUNTY,
MICHAEL HERRICK, Brand Inspector, and
COLORADO BRANDING COMMISSION,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [#23], on
Plaintiffs’ Motion for: Substitution/Correction of Parties Pursuant to FRCP 25,
Required or Permissive Joinder of Parties Under FRCP 19/20 [#36] (the “Motion for
Joinder”), and on Plaintiffs’ Second Motion for Leave of Court to Re-plead and/or
Amend Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 15(a) [#37] (the “Motion to Amend”).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Amend [#37] is GRANTED. The Clerk
of Court shall accept Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint [#37-1] for filing as of the date
of this Minute Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Joinder [#36] is DENIED as moot,
as the requested changes are included in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint [#37-1].
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss [#23] 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motion to dismiss directed at the complaint that is supplanted and superseded.”); AJB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 April 28, 2009) (finding that amended complaint superseded original complaint and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”).
Dated: October 16, 2014