IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 18, 2010
DESIREE MURILLO, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF WOODLAND, RYAN PIERCY, CASEY SULLIVAN, AND DOES 1 TO 40, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT*fn1
On December 30, 2009, Defendants filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) seeking to dismiss certain claims in Plaintiff's complaint. However, on February 11, 2010, the parties filed a joint stipulation in which they stipulate to allowing Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint. Plaintiff then filed a first amended complaint on February 16, 2010, which is now the operative pleading. See Hal Roach Studios, Inc., v. Richard Feiner and Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1989) (stating an amended complaint supercedes the prior complaint). Since the pending dismissal motion does not address the operative pleading, it is denied as moot.