Hayes v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Hospital Authority et al

Filing 34

ORDER denying Defendant's 13 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. Defendant may refile with respect to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 2/5/2020. (brl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-750-GCM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex. rel.,
Daniel H. Hayes, M.D.,
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG
HOSPITAL AUTHOURITY, d/b/a and
n/k/a ATRIUM HEALTH, a North
Carolina Hospital Authority,
Defendant.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (“Motion”) (Doc.
No. 13), directed at Plaintiff’s original Complaint (Doc. No. 1). On August 6, 2019, Plaintiff filed
its First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 22). Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion directed at the
original Complaint is moot. See Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F. 3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001)
(amended pleading renders original pleading of no effect); Hall v. Int’l Union, United Auto.,
Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., UAW, No. 3:10-cv-418, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
66084, 2011 WL 40143515, at * 1 (W.D.N.C. June 21, 2011) (An “amended complaint renders
the defendants’ pending motion to dismiss that are related to the superseding complaint as moot.”).
Thus, Defendant’s Motion is DENIED without prejudice. Defendant may refile with respect to
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. SO ORDERED.
Signed: February 5, 2020

1