Carl N. Morgan v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc.

E.D. California

Carl N. Morgan v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc.

DecidedOctober 23, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-01188

StatusUnknown

This text of Carl N. Morgan v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc. (Carl N. Morgan v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carl N. Morgan v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc., (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARL N. MORGAN, Case No. 1:25-cv-01188-KES-HBK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER MOOTING MOTION

13 v. (Doc. No. 5) 14 LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS, INC., 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 19, 2025, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss pro se Plaintiff’s complaint. 18 (Doc. No. 5). In response, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on October 2, 2025. (Doc. 19 No. 8). The filing by Plaintiff of a first amended complaint moots Defendant’s September 19, 20 2025 motion to dismiss. See CDK Global LLC v. Brnovich, 16 F.4th 1266 (9th Cir. 2021) (“an 21 amended complaint supersedes the original complaint” thereby becoming the “operative 22 pleading.”); Barnes v. Dist. of Columbia, 42 F. Supp. 3d 111, 117 (D.D.C. 2014) (“When a 23 plaintiff files an amended complaint as of right ... the amended complaint becomes the operative 24 pleading ... and any pending motion to dismiss becomes moot.” (cleaned up)). 25 On October 16, 2025, in response to Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, Defendant timely 26 filed a motion to dismiss. (Doc. No. 9). Given Plaintiff pro se status, the Court appraises 27 Plaintiff that absent Defendant consenting or Plaintiff being granted leave to file a second 28 amended complaint, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), Local Rule 230 requires a party to file an opposition 1 | to any motion or a notice of non-opposition within fourteen (14) days from the date the motion 2 | was filed. See L.R. 230(c). The failure of a party to file an opposition may be deemed a waiver 3 | to the granting of the motion. (/d.). Alternatively, because the Defendant has not filed an answer 4 | motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff may file a notice to voluntarily dismiss the action 5 | without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. 6 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 7 Defendant’s motion to dismiss filed on September 19, 2025 (Doc. No. 5) is deemed 8 | MOOT. 9 | Dated: _ October 23, 2025 Wile. Th fareh Zack 11 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARL N. MORGAN, Case No. 1:25-cv-01188-KES-HBK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER MOOTING MOTION

13 v. (Doc. No. 5) 14 LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS, INC., 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 19, 2025, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss pro se Plaintiff’s complaint. 18 (Doc. No. 5). In response, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on October 2, 2025. (Doc. 19 No. 8). The filing by Plaintiff of a first amended complaint moots Defendant’s September 19, 20 2025 motion to dismiss. See CDK Global LLC v. Brnovich, 16 F.4th 1266 (9th Cir. 2021) (“an 21 amended complaint supersedes the original complaint” thereby becoming the “operative 22 pleading.”); Barnes v. Dist. of Columbia, 42 F. Supp. 3d 111, 117 (D.D.C. 2014) (“When a 23 plaintiff files an amended complaint as of right ... the amended complaint becomes the operative 24 pleading ... and any pending motion to dismiss becomes moot.” (cleaned up)). 25 On October 16, 2025, in response to Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, Defendant timely 26 filed a motion to dismiss. (Doc. No. 9). Given Plaintiff pro se status, the Court appraises 27 Plaintiff that absent Defendant consenting or Plaintiff being granted leave to file a second 28 amended complaint, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), Local Rule 230 requires a party to file an opposition 1 | to any motion or a notice of non-opposition within fourteen (14) days from the date the motion 2 | was filed. See L.R. 230(c). The failure of a party to file an opposition may be deemed a waiver 3 | to the granting of the motion. (/d.). Alternatively, because the Defendant has not filed an answer 4 | motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff may file a notice to voluntarily dismiss the action 5 | without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. 6 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 7 Defendant’s motion to dismiss filed on September 19, 2025 (Doc. No. 5) is deemed 8 | MOOT. 9 | Dated: _ October 23, 2025 Wile. Th fareh Zack 11 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Carl N. Morgan v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carl-n-morgan-v-lexisnexis-risk-solutions-inc-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack