Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc.

S.D. California

Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California·Decided February 27, 2021·No. 3:20-cv-01958·Unknown

Opinion

ALLELE BIOTECHNOLOGY AND Case No.: 20-cv-01958-H-AGS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., a California corporation, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT Plaintiff,

v. [Doc. No. 24.] PFIZER, INC., a Delaware corporation; BIONTECH SE, a German company; BIONTECH US, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1-30, Defendants. On October 5, 2020, Plaintiff Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. filed a complaint for patent infringement against Defendants Pfizer, Inc., BioNTech SE, and BioNTech US, Inc, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,221,221. (Doc. No. 1, Compl.) On February 8, 2021, Defendants filed a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 24.) A hearing on the motion to dismiss is currently scheduled for March 15, 2021 at 10:30 a.m. On February 25, 2021, in lieu of filing an opposition to the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint against Defendants. (Doc. No. 29, FAC.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B); see Sanford v. Motts, 258 F. 3d 1117, 1120 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) gives a plaintiff one opportunity to amend as of right.”). In light of the filing of the amended complaint, the Court denies as moot Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice to Defendants moving to dismiss the first amended complaint. See Ramirez v. Cty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) (“It is well-established in our circuit that an ‘amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.’ ... Consequently, the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint superseded the First Amended Complaint, and the First Amended Complaint ceased to exist. Because the Defendants’ motion to dismiss targeted the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, which was no longer in effect, we conclude that the motion to dismiss should have been deemed moot... .” (citations omitted)). The March 15, 2021 hearing date is vacated. || DATED: February 26, 2021 | | \ual |. | | | MARILYN ©. HUF F, Distri ge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ALLELE BIOTECHNOLOGY AND Case No.: 20-cv-01958-H-AGS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., a California corporation, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT Plaintiff,

v. [Doc. No. 24.] PFIZER, INC., a Delaware corporation; BIONTECH SE, a German company; BIONTECH US, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1-30, Defendants. On October 5, 2020, Plaintiff Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. filed a complaint for patent infringement against Defendants Pfizer, Inc., BioNTech SE, and BioNTech US, Inc, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,221,221. (Doc. No. 1, Compl.) On February 8, 2021, Defendants filed a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 24.) A hearing on the motion to dismiss is currently scheduled for March 15, 2021 at 10:30 a.m. On February 25, 2021, in lieu of filing an opposition to the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint against Defendants. (Doc. No. 29, FAC.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B); see Sanford v. Motts, 258 F. 3d 1117, 1120 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) gives a plaintiff one opportunity to amend as of right.”). In light of the filing of the amended complaint, the Court denies as moot Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice to Defendants moving to dismiss the first amended complaint. See Ramirez v. Cty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015) (“It is well-established in our circuit that an ‘amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.’ ... Consequently, the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint superseded the First Amended Complaint, and the First Amended Complaint ceased to exist. Because the Defendants’ motion to dismiss targeted the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, which was no longer in effect, we conclude that the motion to dismiss should have been deemed moot... .” (citations omitted)). The March 15, 2021 hearing date is vacated. || DATED: February 26, 2021 | | \ual |. | | | MARILYN ©. HUF F, Distri ge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc., (S.D. Cal. 2021).

Pincite

Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc. (Allele Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related