Bridgetree Holdings, Inc. et al v. Roselli et al

Filing 20

ORDER denying without prejudice and dismissing as moot 14 Motion to Dismiss Case as Frivolous; denying without prejudice and dismissing as moot 14 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 9/30/14. (clc)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:14-CV-00448-FDW-DSC BRIDGETREE HOLDINGS, INC., and MARK BECK, Plaintiffs, vs. DANIEL ROSELLI, CUSTOMERSTREAM, INC., and JEFF DEWALD, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Daniel Roselli’s Motion to Dismiss Case as Frivolous and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. (Doc. No. 14). For the reasons stated below, Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss are DENIED. On September 11, 2014, Defendant Roselli filed Motions to Dismiss Case as Frivolous and for Failure to State a Claim. (Doc. No. 14). On September 29, 2014, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 19). It is well-established that an amended complaint supersedes the original pleading and renders moot any motions to dismiss made pursuant to the original pleading. See Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001). Therefore, Defendant Roselli’s Motion to Dismiss Case as Frivolous and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed pursuant to Plaintiff’s original complaint (Doc. No. 14) are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and DISMISSED AS MOOT. Additionally, the Court has been informed that there is a disagreement among the parties as to whether joinder of the issues has occurred in light of the Amended Complaint. Accordingly, the parties are directed to re-conduct the Rule 26(f) conference after answers and responses to the Amended Complaint are filed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed: September 30, 2014

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?