Harris v. USAA Federal Savings Bank
This text of Harris v. USAA Federal Savings Bank (Harris v. USAA Federal Savings Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
THOMAS HARRIS,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 2:23-cv-2932 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers USAA FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK,
Defendant.
ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant USAA Federal Savings Bank’s Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 6.) After Defendant filed the Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiff Thomas Harris moved for leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 11.) That Motion was unopposed and granted by the Court. (ECF No. 13.) Amended complaints supersede the original pleadings and thus render pending motions to dismiss moot. Yates v. Applied Performance Techs., Inc., 205 F.R.D. 497, 499 (S.D. Ohio 2002) (Holschuh, J.). Because Mr. Harris filed his amended complaint after the Motion to Dismiss, the amended complaint superseded the original complaint, and the pending Motion to Dismiss became moot. Accordingly, the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as MOOT (ECF No. 6). This case remains open.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3/19/2024 s/Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. DATE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Harris v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-usaa-federal-savings-bank-ohsd-2024.