Zartner v. City and County of Denver, Colorado et al

Filing 29

MINUTE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 2/23/16. Motion to Dismiss # 24 is DENIED as moot.(lgale, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-02218-KLM
KENNETH R. ZARTNER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO,
SHAWN L. MILLER,
DAVID PACHECO,
ROBERT MAZOTTI,
MARIO GALLARDO,
CRAIG PENSON,
JEFFREY STEED,
RICHARD GILSTRAP, and
APRIL KULHANEK, R.N.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Defendant City and County of Denver’s Motion
to Dismiss [#24] (the “Motion”). The Motion was filed on January 25, 2016. On February
16, 2016, Plaintiff timely filed an Amended Complaint as a matter of course pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#24] 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dismiss directed at the complaint that is supplanted and superseded.”); AJB Props., Ltd.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. Apr.
28, 2009) (finding that amended complaint superseded original complaint and “accordingly,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: February 23, 2016