Woodcock v. Ethicon Inc et al

Filing 27

ORDER DENYING 11 MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Salvador Mendoza, Jr. (LMR, Case Administrator)

Case 1:20-cv-03100-SMJ

ECF No. 27

filed 02/17/21

PageID.224 Page 1 of 2

1

FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

2

Feb 17, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

3
4

STEPHANIE WOODCOCK,

5
6
7

SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK

No. 1:20-cv-03100-SMJ

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
DISMISS AS MOOT

JOHNSON & JOHNSON, and
ETHICON, INC.,

8

Defendants.

9
10
11
12

Before the Court, without oral argument, is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 11. The Court denies that motion as moot.

13

Plaintiff sued Defendants on July 9, 2020. ECF No. 1. Defendants moved to

14

dismiss on September 22, 2020 and set a hearing without oral argument for

15

November 12, 2020. ECF No. 11. Four separate times, the parties stipulated and

16

requested for the Court to amend briefing schedule and reset the noting date, which

17

the Court granted each time. See generally ECF Nos. 16, 18, 20 & 22. The Court

18

also granted Plaintiff’s request for leave to file her First Amended Complaint. ECF

19

Nos. 23, 24 & 26.

20

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), after the time for amending

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT – 1

Case 1:20-cv-03100-SMJ

ECF No. 27

filed 02/17/21

PageID.225 Page 2 of 2

1

a pleading as a matter of course has passed, “a party may amend its pleading only

2

with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” An amended

3

complaint supersedes the original complaint and renders it without legal effect. E.g.,

4

Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012); Rhodes v. Robinson,

5

621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) (“As a general rule, when a plaintiff files an

6

amended complaint, [t]he amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter

7

being treated thereafter as non-existent.”) (internal citation and quotation marks

8

omitted). The parties (and the Court) must therefore treat the original pleading

9

Plaintiff

filed

as

nonexistent.

See

id.

The

Court

thus

denies

10

Defendants’ motion to dismiss as moot. See also Huang v. Genesis Glob.

11

Hardware, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-1713-JAM-KJN-PS, 2020 WL 6318206, at *1 (E.D.

12

Cal. Oct. 28, 2020) (collecting cases).

13

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

14

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 11, is

15

DENIED AS MOOT.

16
17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order and
provide copies to all counsel.
DATED this 17th day of February 2021.
___________________________
SALVADOR MENDOZA, JR.
United States District Judge

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT – 2