Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02143/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02143-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 430
Nature of Suit: Banks and Banking
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

- 1 - 09cv2143

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICIA THOMPSON, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 09CV2143 DMS (POR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

vs. DISMISS AS MOOT

CHASE BANK N.A., et al.,

Defendants.

Presently before the Court is a motion to dismiss and motion to strike filed by Defendant Chase

Bank USA, N.A. (Doc. 5) Instead of opposing, Plaintiffs have filed a First Amended Complaint. A

party is entitled to amend pleadings once “as a matter of course” at any time before a responsive

pleading is served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a); see Shaver v. Operating Eng'rs Local 428 Pension Trust

Fund, 332 F.3d 1198, 1201 (9th Cir. 2003) (motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading). Because

Plaintiffs’ amended pleading supersedes the original complaint, the original is no longer operative. 

Bullen v. De Bretteville, 239 F.2d 824, 833 (9th Cir. 1956). Defendant’s motion is therefore denied

as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 6, 2010

HON. DANA M. SABRAW

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02143-DMS-POR Document 7 Filed 01/06/10 Page 1 of 1