Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01064/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01064-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
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

07cv1064

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PLATYPUS WEAR, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HORIZONTE LTDA, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 07CV-1064-L(WMc)

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT AND

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO

TRANSFER VENUE AND TO

DISMISS [doc. #3, 4]

Defendants removed this action from the Superior Court of California, County of San

Diego, on June 11, 2007. Defendants then moved to transfer venue and to dismiss for

insufficiency of service of process and lack of personal jurisdiction. [doc. #3, 4]. The motions

are set for hearing on August 13, 2007.

On July 12, 2007, plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint [doc. #6]. An amended

complaint supersedes a prior complaint as a pleading. Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467,

1474 (9th Cir. 1997); Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546

(9th Cir. 1990). Thus, where a plaintiff elects to file an amended complaint, a district court may

treat an existing motion to dismiss as moot. Because then-pending motions to dismiss are moot

upon the filing of an amended complaint, defendants may reurged any issue with respect to the

amended complaint without prejudice. 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED denying as moot and without prejudice

Case 3:07-cv-01064-L-RBB Document 9 Filed 07/18/07 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 07cv1064

defendants’ motions to transfer venue and to dismiss for insufficiency of service of process and

lack of personal jurisdiction. [doc. #3, 4]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the August

13, 2007 hearing date on defendants’ motions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants

shall have until August 1, 2007 in which to answer or otherwise respond to the first amended

complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 18, 2007

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

COPY TO: 

HON. WILLIAM McCURINE, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

Case 3:07-cv-01064-L-RBB Document 9 Filed 07/18/07 Page 2 of 2