Concordia Pharmaceuticals Inc et al v. Kelley

Filing 17

OPINION AND ORDER dismissing as moot Kelley's 12 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 6/18/2018.(ncha, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
GREENVILLE DIVISION
Concordia Pharmaceuticals Inc., and
Concordia Pharmaceuticals (US) Inc.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Christopher Blake Kelley,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C.A. No. 6:18-704-HMH

OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court on Christopher Blake Kelley’s (“Kelley”) motion to
dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. After review, the court dismisses Kelley’s motion as moot.
An amended complaint ordinarily supersedes the original and renders it of no legal
effect. Young v. City of Mount Rainier, 238 F.3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001). Therefore, a
defendant’s previous motion to dismiss becomes moot when a plaintiff files an amended
complaint. See Sennott v. Adams, No. 6:13-cv-02813-GRA, 2014 WL 2434745, at *3 (D.S.C.
May 29, 2014) (“Thus, a defendant’s previous motion to dismiss is rendered moot when a
plaintiff files an amended complaint.”) (unpublished). In this case, Kelley filed the instant
motion to dismiss on May 17, 2018. (Def. Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 12.) On June 7, 2018,
Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. (First Am. Compl., ECF No. 15.) On June 13, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a second

1

amended complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Second
Am. Compl., ECF No. 16.) Based on the foregoing, Kelley’s motion to dismiss is moot.1
It is therefore
ORDERED that Kelley’s motion to dismiss, docket number 12, is dismissed as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.
Senior United States District Judge
Greenville, South Carolina
June 18, 2018

1

If so desired, Kelley may file a new motion to dismiss within the time frame allotted
by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Sennott, 2014 WL 2434745, at *3.
2