Mayhew v. Candid Color Systems Inc

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA SPENCER MAYHEW, individually and on +) behalf of all others similarly situated; and ) ROSALIE NOREN, individually and on behalf ) of all others similarly situated, ) Plaintiffs, Vv. Case No. CIV-24-00814-JD CANDID COLOR SYSTEMS, INC., an Oklahoma corporation, ) Defendant. ORDER Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Candid Color Systems, Inc. (“Motion”). [Doc. No. 11]. The Motion challenges Plaintiff's original Complaint [Doc. No. 1]. In response to the Motion, Plaintiff timely filed an Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). See [Doc. No. 25]. Plaintiff's amendment “supersedes the original and renders it of no legal effect.” Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp., 929 F.2d 1515, 1517 (10th Cir. 1991); see Predator Int’l, Inc. v. Gamo Outdoor USA, Inc., 793 F.3d 1177, 1180-81 (10th Cir. 2015); Mink v. Suthers, 482 F.3d 1244, 1254 (10th Cir. 2007). Thus, the Motion is moot. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 11] is DENIED as moot and without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of October 2024.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE