Dr. Sumayyah Al Nasser v. Shay Serdy

Opinion

O

United States District Court Central District of California DR. SUMAYYAH AL-NASSER, Case № 2:20-cv-03582-ODW (Ex) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO v. DISMISS [9] AND MOTION TO SHAY SERDY et al., ENFORCE [10] AS MOOT Defendants. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// Defendants Shay Serdy and Peter E. Barker-Homek filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Sumayyah Al-Nasser’s Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and a “Motion to Enforce Federal Rule of Evidence 408,” which the Court construes as a motion to strike portions of the Complaint. (See Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 9; Mot. to Enforce, ECF No. 10.) On May 26, 2020, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint in lieu of opposing Defendants’ motions. (FAC, ECF No. 18; Notices of Filing, ECF Nos. 19-20.) Defendants do not challenge the propriety of Plaintiff's filing an amended complaint and request the Court vacate the pending motions. (See Defs.’ Req., ECF No. 21.) As the pending motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9) and motion to enforce (ECF No. 10) were based on a complaint that is no longer operative, the motions are DENIED as MOOT. See Ramirez v. Cty. of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015). May 28, 2020 “ . ff i Gieddioid 50 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE