Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00682/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00682-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Injunctive &amp; Declaratory Relief

---

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

07cv0682

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERRI ORTIZ, individually and on behalf

of all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 07cv0682-LAB (CAB)

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT

MOTION TO DISMISS

COMPLAINT 

[Dkt No. 13]

vs.

KRAFT FOODS COMPANY, a Delaware

corporation,

Defendants.

On July 30, 2007, the deadline for the filing of an Opposition to defendant's pending

Motion To Dismiss Complaint (Dkt No. 13), plaintiff Terri Ortiz instead filed a First Amended

Complaint. The Ninth Circuit allows a plaintiff to amend the Complaint once as a matter of

right even after a motion to dismiss has been filed (or even granted), as long as the action

has not been dismissed and the amended complaint is otherwise timely. Doe v. United

States, 58 F.3d 494, 496-97 (9th Cir. 1995), citing Schreiber Distributing v. Serv-Well

Furniture Co., 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ("a motion to dismiss is not a 'responsive

pleading' within the meaning of [Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)]") (citation omitted). "Neither the filing

nor granting of such a motion before answer terminates the right to amend. . . ." Schreiber

Distributing, 806 F.2d at 1401 (citation omitted). Accordingly, defendant's Motion To Dismiss

is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 9, 2007

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00682-LAB-JMA Document 19 Filed 08/09/07 Page 1 of 1