Jane Roe 6 v. International Churches of Christ, Inc.
This text of Jane Roe 6 v. International Churches of Christ, Inc. (Jane Roe 6 v. International Churches of Christ, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
O 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court 8 Central District of California 9 10 JANE ROE 6 et al. Case № 2:23-cv-00999-ODW (PLAx) 11 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT [51] 13 v. 14 INTERNATIONAL CHURCHES OF 15 CHRIST, INC. et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 On May 31, 2023, Defendants Alberto Schirmer and Anna Maria Schirmer filed 2 || a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Jane Roe 6 and Jane Roe 7’s Complaint pursuant to 3 || Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 51.) On June 16, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint, less than twenty-one days after 5 || Defendants filed their motion. (ECF No. 57.) Rule 15(a)(1) allows Plaintiffs to file 6 || an amended complaint once as a matter of course within twenty-one days of service of 7 || a Rule 12(b) motion. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ amended complaint was proper under the 8 | Rules. As the pending motion to dismiss is based on a complaint that is no longer 9 || operative, the motion is DENIED as MOOT. (ECF No. 51.) See Ramirez v. Cnty. of 10 || San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015). 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 June 23, 2023 ss 15 es
7 OTIS D. WRIGHT, II ig UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jane Roe 6 v. International Churches of Christ, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jane-roe-6-v-international-churches-of-christ-inc-cacd-2023.