Umouyo v. Bank of America NA

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: July 1, 2022
• Docket: 2:22-cv-00704
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3

4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 HENRY A. UMOUYO, et al., CASE NO. 2:22-cv-00704-JHC 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER 9 v. 10 BANK OF AMERICA NA, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13

14 This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Bank of America, N.A. and 15 Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed on 16 May 31, 2022. Dkt. # 6. On June 20, 2022, Plaintiff Henry A. Umouyo filed an amended 17 complaint. Dkt. # 14. Defendants then filed a Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint. 18 Dkt. # 17. 19 In the Ninth Circuit, the filing of “an amended complaint supercedes the original 20 complaint and renders it without legal effect.” Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th 21 Cir. 2012). “Courts often apply this rule to motions to dismiss a complaint that has since been 22 superseded and deny such motions as moot.” Bisson v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. C12-0995JLR, 23 2012 WL 5866309, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 16, 2012) (collecting cases). Plaintiff’s amended 24 l complaint (Dkt. # 14) has superseded the original complaint (Dkt. # 1-2) and is now the 2 operative pleading in this proceeding. Accordingly, the Court STRIKES Defendants’ motion to 3 dismiss the original complaint (Dkt. # 6) as moot. See Caldwell v. Boeing Co., No. C17- 4 1741JLR, 2018 WL 2113980, at *3 (W.D. Wash. May 8, 2018) (“the court denied Boeing’s first 5 motion to dismiss as moot because Mr. Caldwell’s second amended complaint superseded his 6 original complaint and rendered his original complaint without legal effect.”). 7 The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and g || to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address. 9 Dated this Ist day of July, 2022. 10 C]eh 4. Chu 11 John H. Chun United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24