Gastelum v. Blue Diamond Hospitality LLC

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: February 4, 2022
• Docket: 5:21-cv-06234
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 FERNANDO GASTELUM, Case No. 5:21-cv-06234-EJD

9 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT 10 v.

11 BLUE DIAMOND HOSPITALITY LLC, Re: Dkt. No. 23 Defendant. 12

13 14 Before the Court is Defendant Blue Diamond Hospitality LLC’s (“Blue Diamond”) motion 15 to dismiss Plaintiff Fernando Gastelum’s complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 12(b)(1). Dkt. No. 23. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(a), Gastelum’s response to that motion is 17 due on February 8, 2022. On February 4, 2022, in lieu of filing an opposition to Blue Diamond’s 18 motion and before Blue Diamond filed a responsive pleading to the original complaint, Gastelum 19 filed an amended complaint. Dkt. No. 27. 20 A plaintiff may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days of service of 21 a motion under Rule 12(b). Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).1 An amended pleading generally supersedes an 22 original pleading. Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner and Co., Inc., 896 F.3d 1542, 1546 23 (9th Cir. 1989). 24 Accordingly, the Court DENIES Blue Diamond’s motion to dismiss as moot. Should Blue 25

26 1 A Rule 12 motion is not a “responsive pleading.” See CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. Werner 27 Enters., Inc., 479 F.3d 1099, 1104 n.3 (9th Cir. 2007). 1 Diamond wish to file a new motion challenging the amended complaint, it may retain its currently 2 || reserved hearing date of June 30, 2022. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: February 4, 2022 5 6 EDWARD J. DAVILA 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 a 12

© 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 || Case No.: 5:21-cv-06234-EJD ORDER DENYING MOT. TO DISMISS AS MOOT