Edakunni v. Mayorkas

W.D. Washington

Edakunni v. Mayorkas

DecidedJuly 1, 2022

Docket2:21-cv-00393

StatusUnknown

This text of Edakunni v. Mayorkas (Edakunni v. Mayorkas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Edakunni v. Mayorkas, (W.D. Wash. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE 10 11 DEEPTHI WARRIER EDAKUNNI, et al., CASE NO. 2:21-cv-00393-TL 12 Plaintiff(s), ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO v. FILE THIRD AMENDED 13 ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of COMPLAINT 14 the Department of Homeland Security, 15 Defendant(s). 16

17 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion to file a third amended 18 complaint (Dkt. No. 84). Defendant does not oppose this amendment. Dkt. No. 85. 19 There is also a pending motion to file a proposed second amended complaint (Dkt. No. 20 60). The most recent amendment supersedes the earlier-filed proposed complaint. See Rhodes v. 21 Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) (explaining that the filing of a second amended 22 complaint renders the original complaint “non-existent”); accord Ferdick v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 23 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 915 (1992), (“after amendment the original 24 1 pleading no longer performs any function and is treated thereafter as non-existent”) (internal 2 citation and quotation omitted). 3 Accordingly, the Court: 4 1. GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Dkt. No.

5 84); and 6 2. STRIKES as moot Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint 7 (Dkt. No. 60). 8 Dated this 1st day of July 2022. 9 A 10 Tana Lin United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

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 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE 10 11 DEEPTHI WARRIER EDAKUNNI, et al., CASE NO. 2:21-cv-00393-TL 12 Plaintiff(s), ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO v. FILE THIRD AMENDED 13 ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of COMPLAINT 14 the Department of Homeland Security, 15 Defendant(s). 16

17 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion to file a third amended 18 complaint (Dkt. No. 84). Defendant does not oppose this amendment. Dkt. No. 85. 19 There is also a pending motion to file a proposed second amended complaint (Dkt. No. 20 60). The most recent amendment supersedes the earlier-filed proposed complaint. See Rhodes v. 21 Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) (explaining that the filing of a second amended 22 complaint renders the original complaint “non-existent”); accord Ferdick v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 23 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 915 (1992), (“after amendment the original 24 1 pleading no longer performs any function and is treated thereafter as non-existent”) (internal 2 citation and quotation omitted). 3 Accordingly, the Court: 4 1. GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Dkt. No.

5 84); and 6 2. STRIKES as moot Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint 7 (Dkt. No. 60). 8 Dated this 1st day of July 2022. 9 A 10 Tana Lin United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Edakunni v. Mayorkas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edakunni-v-mayorkas-wawd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack