Pasco Systems Corp. v. B2, LLC

• Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
• Decided: February 19, 2026
• Docket: 8:25-cv-00612
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

PASCO SYSTEMS CORP.,

Plaintiff, 8:25CV612

vs. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S B2, LLC, MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendant.

This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Partial Motion [sic] to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Filing 19. On February 5, 2026, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, as a matter of course within 21 days after the filing of Defendant’s Motion. Filing 20; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). The Court takes no position on whether the Amended Complaint remedies any deficiencies in the original Complaint or is subject to the same challenges raised in Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s original Complaint. Instead, the Court notes that the original Complaint has now been superseded by Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, which renders the original Complaint a nullity. See Wullschleger v. Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc., 75 F.4th 918, 922 (8th Cir. 2023) (“[A]n amended complaint [supersedes] an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect.” (quoting In re Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th Cir. 2000)), cert. granted, 144 S. Ct. 1455 (2024), and aff'd, No. 23-677, 2025 WL 96212 (U.S. Jan. 15, 2025). The Court concludes that the appropriate course in these circumstances is to deny Defendant’s Partial Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) without prejudice to reassertion as to the Amended Complaint if Defendant chooses to do so. Accordingly, 1 IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Partial Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), Filing 19, is denied without prejudice to reassertion as to the Amended Complaint and in full compliance with applicable local rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dated this 19th day of February, 2026.

BY THE COURT: BEE. United States District Judge