UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 2, 2010
GRACIELA RUIZ DE NAVARRO, PLAINTIFF,
GREENLIGHT FINANCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Michael M. Anello United States District Judge
ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT [Doc. Nos. 5 & 7]
On April 1, 2010, Plaintiff Graciela Ruiz De Navarro commenced an action in Imperial County Superior Court against defendants Greenlight Financial Services, Erica Lizarraga, Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc., and Chicago Title Company. On August 5, 2010, Greenlight removed the action to this Court. Greenlight filed a [Doc. No. 5] motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) on August 10, 2010. On August 13, 2010, Saxon also filed a [Doc. No. 7] motion to dismiss. On August 27, 2010, in lieu of any opposition papers, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint [Doc. No. 9].*fn1 The complaint which Greenlight and Saxon move to dismiss is no longer the operative pleading in this action. An amended complaint supercedes the original complaint. Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997); King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987). Once a plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Because the pending motions seek dismissal of a complaint that is no longer the operative pleading in this case, the motions have become moot.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants Greenlight Financial Services and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.'s [Doc. Nos. 5 & 7] motions to dismiss are DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.