BMO Harris Bank NA v. American National Bank

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

BMO HARRIS BANK NA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 20-C-546

SCOTT BERKOVITZ, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT

Plaintiff BMO Harris Bank NA commenced this action on April 2, 2020. Defendants M.R.C. Leasing, Inc. and Michael Chizek subsequently filed a motion to dismiss all claims against Defendant Michael Chizek pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) on April 22, 2020. Dkt. No. 27. After filing a response opposing this motion, Plaintiff moved the court for leave to file an amended complaint on May 14, 2020. Dkt. No. 45. The court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave after no objection to its request was filed, making Plaintiff’s amended complaint the controlling pleading. Dkt. No. 48. The filing of an amended complaint generally renders moot any pending motion to dismiss. See, e.g., Lim v. Central DuPage Hosp., 972 F.2d 758, 762 (7th Cir. 1992) (noting trial judge’s denial of a pending motion to dismiss as moot in light of an amended complaint); Johnson v. Dossey, 515 F.3d 778, 780 (7th Cir. 2008) (“When an amended complaint is filed, the prior pleading is withdrawn and the amended pleading is controlling.”). Accordingly, the pending motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 27) will be DENIED as moot. SO ORDERED at Green Bay, Wisconsin this 16th day of June, 2020. s/ William C. Griesbach