Best v. Mobile Streams, Inc. et al

Filing 95

ORDER denying as moot all motions pertaining to plaintiff's first amended complaint filed in this matter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 3/12/2013. (art)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

BLAKE BEST,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:12-cv-564
Barrett, J.
Litkovitz, M.J.

v.
MOBILE STREAMS, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER

There are currently a number of pending motions before the Court related to plaintiffs
first amended complaint. As the undersigned has granted plaintiffs motion to file a second
amended complaint, see Doc. 93, all motions pertaining to the first amended complaint are
denied as moot. Specifically, the following motions:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)

plaintiffs motion to reissue summons (Doc. 13);
plaintiffs motion to extend time for service (Doc. 16);
plaintiffs amended motion to extend time for service (Doc. 23);
plaintiffs second amended motion to extend time for service (Doc. 27);
plaintiffs motion for default (Doc. 53);
defendant Funmobile, Ltd.'s motion to strike plaintiffs motion for default (Doc. 54);
defendant Mobilefunster, Inc.'s motion to dismiss (Doc. 57);
defendant Funmobile, Ltd.'s motion to dismiss (Doc. 59);
plaintiffs motion to file a supplemental memorandum in opposition to Funmobile Ltd.'s
motion to dismiss (Doc. 69);
(10) plaintiffs motion to dismiss Mobilefunster, Inc's counterclaims (Doc. 74); and
(11) plaintiffs motion to strike Mobilefunster, Inc.'s affirmative defenses (Doc. 75)
are denied as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date:

1,

~~~..3

~/~
Karen L. Litkovitz
United States Magistrate Judge