Patrick C. Shaltry, I v. Brent Benzing, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
• Decided: January 23, 2026
• Docket: 1:25-cv-13704
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION PATRICK C. SHALTRY, I, Case No. 1:25-cv-13704

Plaintiff, F. Kay Behm United States District Judge v. Patricia T. Morris BRENT BENZING, et al., United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. / ORDER DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON PENDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS (ECF Nos. 10, 12, 13 & 16) This is a civil rights case. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on January 22, 2026, as a matter of course pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). The first amended complaint is therefore the operative pleading. Currently pending are Defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 10, 12, 13 & 16), and “[b]ecause amended complaints supersede the original pleading, the filing of the amended complaint in this case did technically render the pending motion[s] to dismiss moot.” Yates v. Applied Performance Techs., Inc., 205 F.R.D. 497, 499 (S.D. Ohio 2002).

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that on or before February 17, 2026, Defendants shall either (1) file supplemental briefing addressing the first amended complaint and specifically identifying which arguments from their they continue to rely upon or (2) withdraw their pending motions to dismiss and file new motions directed at the first amended complaint. The Court will consider only

those arguments raised in the original motions that are expressly incorporated or referenced in any supplemental filing. See Kentucky Press Ass’n, Inc. v. Kentucky, 355 F. Supp. 2d 853, 857 (E.D. Ky. 2005).

IT IS SO ORDERD. Date: January 23, 2026 s/ patricia t. morris Patricia T. Morris United States Magistrate Judge