United States of America et al v. Palmetto Brookview Operating LLC et al

Filing 50

ORDER dismissing as moot 37 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; dismissing as moot 38 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting in part and denying in part 47 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer; The time to respond to the amended complaint or otherwise move is extended until 6/10/16. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 5/3/16.(sfla)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
SPARTANBURG DIVISION
United States of America, ex rel.
Tracy Martin,
Plaintiff,

vs.
Palmetto Brookview Operating L.L.C.,
d/b/a Brookview Healthcare Center,
Palmetto Health Care, L.L.C., Millenium
Management, L.L.C., and Functional
Pathways of Tennessee L.L.C.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C.A. No. 7:15-0556-HMH
OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court on Defendant Functional Pathways, L.L.C.’s (“Functional
Pathways”) and Defendants Palmetto Brookview Operating, L.L.C. d/b/a Brookview Healthcare
Center (“Brookview”) and Palmetto Health Care, L.L.C.’s (“Palmetto”) motions to dismiss
Plaintiff Tracy Martin’s (“Martin”) claims against them pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Defendants Brookview, Palmetto, and Millennium
Management, L.L.C.’s (“Millennium”) consent motion for an extension of time to answer the
amended complaint or otherwise move pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
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). “Thus, a
defendant’s previous motion to dismiss is rendered moot when a plaintiff files an amended
complaint.” Sennott v. Adams, No. 6:13-cv-02813-GRA, 2014 WL 2434745, at *3 (D.S.C.
1

May 29, 2014) (unpublished). In this case, Functional Pathways filed a motion to dismiss on
March 15, 2016, (Def. Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 37), and Brookview and Palmetto filed a motion
to dismiss on March 20, 2016, (Defs. Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 38). On April 8, 2016, Martin
responded by amending her complaint pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. (Am. Compl., ECF No. 41.) On April 25, 2016, Functional Pathways filed a second
motion to dismiss. (Def. Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 46.) Based on the foregoing, Functional
Pathways’ first motion to dismiss and Brookview and Palmetto’s motion to dismiss are rendered
moot.
Further, on April 26, 2016, Brookview, Palmetto, and Millennium filed a motion for an
extension of time until July 6, 2016, to respond to the amended complaint. (Consent Mot. Ext.
Time, ECF No. 47.) After carefully reviewing their request, the court grants Brookview,
Palmetto, and Millennium’s motion until June 10, 2016, to respond to the amended complaint or
otherwise move.
It is therefore

2

ORDERED that Defendant Functional Pathways’ motion to dismiss, docket number 37,
is dismissed as moot. It is further
ORDERED that Defendants Brookview and Palmetto’s motion to dismiss, docket
number 38, is dismissed as moot. It is further
ORDERED that Defendants Brookview, Palmetto, and Millennium’s consent motion
for an extension of time, docket number 47, is granted in part and denied in part and the time to
respond to the amended complaint or otherwise move is extended until June 10, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.
Senior United States District Judge
Greenville, South Carolina
May 3, 2016

3