Intrust Financial Corporation v. Entrust Federal Credit Union

Filing 13

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. 6) is denied as moot and Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time and for limited discovery (Doc. 10) is denied as moot. See attached for more details. Signed by U.S. District Senior Judge Sam A. Crow on 1/17/2012. (bmw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Intrust Financial Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.

No. 11-1312-SAC

Entrust Financial Credit Union,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on two motions.
Defendant Entrust Federal Credit Union moves to dismiss the Plaintiff's
complaint. Because Defendant filed no answer to the original complaint,
Plaintiff was free to amend its complaint without leave of court. See
Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1) (“A party may amend the party's pleading once as a
matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served....”);
Adams v. Campbell County Sch. Dist., 483 F.2d 1351, 1353 (10th Cir. 1973)
(“A motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading within the meaning of
Rule 15(a).”). Plaintiff did so. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to dismiss,
which was directed only at Plaintiff’s original complaint, was rendered moot
when Plaintiff filed its amended complaint.
Plaintiff moves the Court for an order extending its time to respond to
the Defendant's motion to dismiss and to conduct limited discovery
concerning personal jurisdiction in support of its response to the

motion. Because the underlying motion is moot, Plaintiff's motion is similarly
moot.
IT IS THERE FORE ORDERED that Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc.
6) is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for an extension of
time and for limited discovery (Doc. 10) is denied as moot.
Dated this 17th day of January, 2012 at Topeka, Kansas.
s/ Sam A. Crow
Sam A. Crow, U.S. District Senior Judge

2