Sims v. Windstream Communications Inc et al

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 9 Motion to Dismiss as moot without prejudice. The Court will allow Plaintiff to amend her Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 9/15/2011. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (tmg)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:11-CV-308-MOC-DSC LASHONDA SIMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) WINSDTREAM COMMUNICATIONS, ) INC., JENNIFER BUCK, JOSH ) IMHOFF, ADAM COVINGTON, and ) SUE INTIHAR, ) ) Defendants. ) ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on “Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss” (doc. 9) filed July 19, 2011 and its accompanying memorandum (doc. 10). On August 8, 2011, the Court notified Plaintiff of her right to respond and advised her that failure to do so may result in dismissal of her case. (doc. 11). On August 22, 2011, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (doc. 13) which she requested to be “review[ed] . . .as [her] response” (doc. 12). On September 1, 2011, Defendants’ filed their “Reply in Further Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss” (doc. 14). Having conferred with the chambers of the Honorable Max O. Cogburn, Jr. (the District Judge to whom this case is assigned), the Court will allow Plaintiff to amend her Complaint. It is well settled that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that motions directed at superseded pleadings are to be denied as moot. Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F. 3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001) (amended pleading renders original pleading of no effect); Turner v. Kight, 192 F. Supp. 2d 391, 397 (D. Md. 2002) (denying as moot motion to dismiss original complaint on grounds that amended complaint superseded original complaint). Accordingly, “Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss” is administratively DENIED as moot without prejudice. SO ORDERED. Signed: September 15, 2011

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?