Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01988/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01988-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STANISLAUS CUSTODIAL DEPUTY CASE NO. CV F 09-1988 LJO SMS

SHERIFFS’ ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiff, ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO

DISMISS (Doc. 11)

vs.

DEPUTY SHERIFF’S ASSOCIATION OF

STANISLAUS COUNTY, and VINCE

BIZZINI,

Defendants.

 /

By notice on December 21, 2009, defendants DeputySheriff’s Association of Stanislaus County

and Vince Bizzini (collectively “ defendants”) moved to dismiss plaintiff Stanislaus Custodial Deputy

Sheriffs’ Association’s (“plaintiff’s”) complaint, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). In response,

plaintiff filed an amended complaint, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1), on January 14, 2010.

An amended complaint supercedes a previous complaint renderingmoot a motion to dismissthe

original complaint. See e.g., Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1991); Bullen v. De

Bretteville, 239 F.2d 824, 833 (9th Cir. 1956) (“[A]n amended pleading supercedes the original, the

latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.”). Accordingly, this Court TERMINATES defendants’

motion to dismiss and VACATES the February 2, 2010 hearing on the motion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 15, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

Case 1:09-cv-01988-LJO -SMS Document 15 Filed 01/15/10 Page 1 of 1