Walker et al v. BuildDirect.com Technologies Inc et al

Filing 20

ORDER finding as moot 14 Motion to Dismiss; finding as moot 15 Motion to Compel. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 9/20/2011. (mb, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ERIC WALKER, et al, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) BUILDDIRECT.COM TECHNOLOGIES, ) INC., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) Case No. CIV-11-800-D ORDER Before the Court are BuildDirect.com Technologies, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Class Action Complaint [Doc. No. 14] and Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss [Doc. No. 15]. Both challenge the sufficiency of the Class Action Complaint to permit Plaintiffs to proceed with a civil action in this Court. However, on September 19, 2011, Plaintiffs timely filed their First Amended Class Action Complaint [Doc. No. 18].1 This amendment supersedes Plaintiffs’ original pleading and renders it of no legal effect. See Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp.. 929 F.2d 1515, 1517 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Mink v. Suthers, 482 F.3d 1244, 1254 (10th Cir. 2007); Miller v. Glanz, 948 F.2d 1562, 1565 (10th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, Defendant’s Motions directed at Plaintiffs’ original pleading are moot. 1 A plaintiff may amend as a matter of right within 21 days after service of a Rule 12(b) motion or a responsive pleading. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motions [Doc. Nos. 14 and 15] are DENIED without prejudice to resubmission, if appropriate, in response to the amended pleading. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of September, 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?