Soto v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC et al

Filing 24

ORDER that the 14 Motion to Dismiss and 15 Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More Definite Statement is DENIED as moot without prejudice. The hearing on these motions scheduled for 5/2/2016 at 1:30 p.m. is VACATED. Soto and Aria's 23 Stipulation is approved in all other respects. Aria's deadline to respond to the amended complaint is extended to 3/18/2016. The 13 FIRST STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Respond to the 1 Complaint is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 2/25/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4

William Soto,

5

2:16-cv-00064-JAD-PAL

Plaintiff

6

v.

7

Aria Resort & Casino, LLC, et al.,

8

Order Denying Motions to Dismiss as Moot
in Light of Amended Complaint
Defendants

[ECF 13, 14, 15, 23]

9
10

Plaintiff William Soto sues his employer, the Aria Resort & Casino, LLC, and a handful

11

of individuals for various torts and state statutory violations related to events that occurred in the

12

course of his job. After Aria and one of the individual defendants, Melanie Saljougui, filed

13

motions to dismiss,1 Soto filed an amended complaint.2 Soto and Aria agreed that Aria would

14

withdraw its motion to dismiss and have until March 18, 2016, to respond to the amended

15

complaint.3

16

“It is well-established in our circuit that an ‘amended complaint supersedes the original’”

17

and moots any motion to dismiss claims in the original complaint.4 Because Soto’s amended

18

complaint mooted Aria’s and Saljougui’s motions to dismiss, I deny both of them [ECF 14, 15]

19

as moot and without prejudice. I approve Soto and Aria’s stipulation [ECF 23] in all other

20

respects. So Aria will have until March 18, 2016, to respond to the amended complaint; all other

21

parties’ deadline for response is governed by FRCP 15(a)(3). And finally, I deny as moot the

22

stipulation between Soto and Saljougui extending Saljougui’s time to respond to the original

23

complaint [ECF 13].

24
25

1

ECF 14, 15.

26

2

ECF 21.

3

ECF 23.

27
28

4

Ramirez v. Cty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting Forsyth v.
Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997) (internal citation omitted)).

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Aria’s Partial Motion to

2

Dismiss Plaintiff’s Seventh Cause of Action for Alleged Violation of NRS § 200.360 and

3

Defendant Melanie Saljougui’s Motion for [sic] Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More

4

Definite Statement [ECF 14 and 15] are DENIED as moot and without prejudice. The hearing

5

on these motions scheduled for May 2, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. is VACATED.

6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Soto and Aria’s stipulation [ECF 23] is approved in

7

all other respects. Aria’s deadline to respond to the amended complaint is extended to

8

March 18, 2016.

9
10
11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the stipulation between Soto and Saljougui extending
Saljougui’s time to respond to the original complaint [ECF 13] is DENIED as moot.
Dated this 25th day of February, 2016

12

_______________________________
_________________ _
_
__ _____________
Jennifer A. Dorsey
. Dorsey
s
United States District Judge
States District Judge
e Di
ud
ud

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2