Branson v. Slentz

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA RONALD RAY BRANSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) Case No. CIV-25-688-G ) CITY OF NEWCASTLE, OKLAHOMA, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER Now before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11), jointly filed by a current and a former defendant and seeking dismissal of the claims raised in Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. No. 1). Plaintiff has now timely filed an Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 15). Plaintiff's Amended Complaint supersedes the original Complaint and renders it of no legal effect. See Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp., 929 F.2d 1515, 1517 (10th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, the pending Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of September, 2025.

CHARLES B. GOODWIN United States District Judge