Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01907/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01907-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LA JOLLA COVE INVESTORS, INC. a

California corporation,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 11CV1907 JLS (JMA)

ORDER RE JOINT MOTION RE

COUNTERCLAIM OF

GOCONNECT LIMITED

(ECF No. 42)

vs.

GOCONNECT LIMITED, an Australian

corporation, and DOES 1–10, inclusive,

Defendants.

Presently before the Court is the parties’ joint motion re counterclaim of GoConnect

Limited (“GoConnect”). (Jt. Mot., ECF No. 42) On October 27, 2011, GoConnect filed an answer

to La Jolla Cove Investors, Inc.’s (“La Jolla Cove”) original complaint, and also asserted a

counterclaim. (ECF No. 11) Subsequently, La Jolla Cove filed an amended complaint, (ECF No.

23), which GoConnect answered on January 27, 2012. (ECF No. 27) GoConnect did not,

however, refile its counterclaim. Accordingly, the parties have now requested that the Court

“[i]ssue an order confirming that the Counter-Claim filed on October 27, 2011 by

GoConnect . . . is the operative Counter-Claim and has not been superseded by any subsequent

pleading.” (Jt. Mot. 2, ECF No. 42)

- 1 - 11cv1907

Case 3:11-cv-01907-JMA Document 43 Filed 04/18/12 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

As the parties are well aware, an amended pleading “supersedes the original, the latter

being treated thereafter as nonexistent.” Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 75 (9th Cir. 1987). And so,

here, GoConnect’s answer to La Jolla Cove’s amended complaint superseded the answer and

counterclaim asserted in response to the original complaint. See 6 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R.

Miller & Mary Kay Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1476 (3d ed. 2010) (“[W]hen the

complaint is amended defendant should be entitled to amend the answer to meet the contents of the

new complaint and, if this is done, any admissions in the initial responsive pleading will be

superseded by the amended answer.”). 

Notwithstanding the above, because the parties agree that GoConnect’s October 27, 2011,

counterclaim was not intended to be superseded by its subsequent answer to the amended

complaint, the Court will permit GoConnect to file an amended answer and counterclaim in

response to the amended complaint. GoConnect SHALL FILE its amended answer and

counterclaim (attached as Exhibit A to the instant motion) within seven days of the date this Order

is electronically docketed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 18, 2012

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

- 2 - 11cv1907

Case 3:11-cv-01907-JMA Document 43 Filed 04/18/12 Page 2 of 2