Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00892/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00892-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

ISSA ZACHARIA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

)

CITY OF MADERA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

CV F 06-0892 AWI SMS

ORDER VACATING OCTOBER 2,

2006 HEARING DATE 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

DISMISS AS MOOT 

(Document #9)

On August 15, 2006, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss portions of the amended

complaint. The motion to dismiss was set for oral argument to be heard on October 2, 2006.

On September 25, 2006, the parties filed a stipulation, allowing Plaintiff to file a second

amended complaint and vacating the October 2, 2006 hearing. Plaintiff filed a second amended

complaint the same day.

 Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a “party may amend the

party's pleading once as a matter of course . . . Otherwise a party may amend only by leave of

court or by written consent of the adverse party. . . .” Because the adverse parties consent to

Plaintiff’s filing of a second amended complaint, the court will proceed on the second amended

complaint. Once filed, the second amended complaint supercedes all other complaints. See

London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811 (9th Cir.1981); Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th

Cir. 1967). Defendants’ motion addressing the amended complaint is now moot. To avoid any

Case 1:06-cv-00892-AWI -SMS Document 12 Filed 09/27/06 Page 1 of 2
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 2

unnecessary work by the parties and the court, the court will deny the motion directed at the

amended complaint as moot at this time, and allow Defendants the opportunity to file another

motion or any other response to the second amended complaint authorized by the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure. 

Accordingly, the court orders that:

1. The previously set hearing date of October 2, 2006, is VACATED, and the parties shall

not appear at that time; and

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 25, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00892-AWI -SMS Document 12 Filed 09/27/06 Page 2 of 2