Apex Tool Group LLC v. Cyderes, LLC

W.D. North Carolina

Apex Tool Group LLC v. Cyderes, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina

DecidedJuly 12, 2023

Docket3:23-cv-00236

StatusUnknown

This text of Apex Tool Group LLC v. Cyderes, LLC (Apex Tool Group LLC v. Cyderes, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Apex Tool Group LLC v. Cyderes, LLC, (W.D.N.C. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:23-CV-00236-KDB-SCR

APEX TOOL GROUP LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ORDER CYDERES, LLC, et. al., ) ) Defendants. )

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss” (Doc. No. 19) filed June 20, 2023. Plaintiff filed its “Amended Complaint” (Doc. No. 25) on July 11, 2023. Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs amendments to pleadings. Rule 15(a)(1) grants a party the right to “amend its pleading once as a matter of course,” if done within 21 days after serving the pleading, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(A), or “if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required,” a party may amend once as a matter of course, provided that it does so within “21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). The Rule further provides that leave to amend shall be freely given “when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Plaintiff filed its Amended Complaint within 21 days following receipt of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. No Answer has been filed. Accordingly, the amendment is as a matter of course. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). It is well-settled that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that motions directed at superseded pleadings are to be denied as moot. Hall v. Int’] Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., No. 3:10-CV-418-RJC-DSC, 2011 WL 4014315, at *1 (W.D.N.C. June 21, 2011); Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 572-73 (4th Cir. 2001). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss” (Doc. No. 19) is administratively DENIED as moot without prejudice. 2. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel for the parties and to the Honorable Kenneth Bell. SO ORDERED. Signed: July 11, 2023

Susan C. Rodriguez ey United States Magistrate Judge

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:23-CV-00236-KDB-SCR

APEX TOOL GROUP LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ORDER CYDERES, LLC, et. al., ) ) Defendants. )

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss” (Doc. No. 19) filed June 20, 2023. Plaintiff filed its “Amended Complaint” (Doc. No. 25) on July 11, 2023. Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs amendments to pleadings. Rule 15(a)(1) grants a party the right to “amend its pleading once as a matter of course,” if done within 21 days after serving the pleading, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(A), or “if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required,” a party may amend once as a matter of course, provided that it does so within “21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). The Rule further provides that leave to amend shall be freely given “when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Plaintiff filed its Amended Complaint within 21 days following receipt of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. No Answer has been filed. Accordingly, the amendment is as a matter of course. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). It is well-settled that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that motions directed at superseded pleadings are to be denied as moot. Hall v. Int’] Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., No. 3:10-CV-418-RJC-DSC, 2011 WL 4014315, at *1 (W.D.N.C. June 21, 2011); Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 572-73 (4th Cir. 2001). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss” (Doc. No. 19) is administratively DENIED as moot without prejudice. 2. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel for the parties and to the Honorable Kenneth Bell. SO ORDERED. Signed: July 11, 2023

Susan C. Rodriguez ey United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Apex Tool Group LLC v. Cyderes, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/apex-tool-group-llc-v-cyderes-llc-ncwd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack