Kumar v. Tata Consultancy Services Limited

Filing 20

ORDER denying as moot 9 Motion to Dismiss and 11 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge Cristina D. Silva on 3/5/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MAM)

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

2
3
4 Selva Kumar,

Order Denying as Moot Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative,
Motion to Compel Arbitration

Plaintiff

5
6

Case No.: 2:24-cv-02256-CDS-EJY

v.

7 Tata Consultancy Services Limited,
8

Defendant

[ECF Nos. 9, 11]

9
10

Plaintiff Selva Kumar filed a first amended complaint on February 5, 2025. ECF No. 13.

11 Because an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint in its entirety, defendant Tata
12 Consultancy Services Limited’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion to compel
13 arbitration [ECF No. 9] targeting the original pleading is deemed moot. Ramirez v. Cnty. of San
14 Bernadino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1009 (9th Cir. 2015). Further, because Tata has filed a motion to compel
15 arbitration (ECF No. 18), its motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion to compel
16 arbitration [ECF No. 11] is also denied as moot.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Dated: March 5, 2025
_________ _______________ __________
Cristina D. Silva
United States District Judge