Integrity Medical Product Solutions, LLC v. Seroclinix Corporation
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The court considered a joint motion to amend a third-party complaint and a pending motion to dismiss that complaint. The court granted the motion to amend and terminated the motion to dismiss as moot.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the Joint Motion to Amend the Third-Party Complaint“Consequently, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion. (ECF No. 82.)” | agree with court The order recites that the parties filed a joint motion to amend. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), a party may amend its pleading with the other party's written consent. The court correctly applied this rule to grant the motion. |
Terminating Honu Management's Motion to Dismiss the Third-Party Complaint as moot“Further, in light of the amended pleading, the Court TERMINATES AS MOOT Honu’s Motion to Dismiss the Third-Party Complaint. (ECF No. 74.)” | agree with court The court relied on the principle that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, rendering the original without legal effect. Therefore, a motion to dismiss the original complaint is moot once the complaint is amended. This is a standard procedural outcome in federal litigation. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly applies Rule 15(a)(2) to grant the joint motion to amend. It correctly applies the well-established principle that an amended complaint supersedes the original, thereby rendering the motion to dismiss the original complaint moot. The reasoning is concise and legally sound.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 INTEGRITY MEDICAL PRODUCT Case No. 22-cv-0785-BAS-BLM SOLUTIONS, LLC, 12 ORDER: Plaintiff, 13 v. (1) GRANTING JOINT MOTION 14 TO AMEND THIRD-PARTY SEROCLINIX CORPORATION, et al., 15 COMPLAINT (ECF No. 82); Defendants. AND 16 17 (2) TERMINATING AS MOOT SEROCLINIX CORPORATION, et al., MOTION TO DISMISS THIRD- 18 PARTY COMPLAINT Third-Party Plaintiffs, 19 (ECF No. 74) v. 20 HONU MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC, 21 Third-Party Defendant. 22 23 24 Seroclinix Delaware and Seroclinix Canada filed a Third-Party Complaint against 25 Honu Management Group, LLC. (ECF No. 66.) Honu Management moved to dismiss the 26 Third-Party Complaint on several grounds. (ECF No. 74.) 27 More recently, these parties filed a Joint Motion to Amend the Third-Party 28 Complaint. (ECF No. 82.) Under Rule 15, a party may amend its pleading with the other 1 || party’s written consent. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Consequently, the Court GRANTS the 2 || Joint Motion. (ECF No. 82.) Third-Party Plaintiffs shall file their First Amended Third- 3 Party Complaint no later than July 18, 2025. Honu Management shall respond to the 4 ||amended pleading no later than August 1, 2025. 5 Further, in light of the amended pleading, the Court TERMINATES AS MOOT 6 || Honu’s Motion to Dismiss the Third-Party Complaint. (ECF No. 74.) See Lacey vy. 7 || Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc) (“The general rule is that an 8 |}amended complaint [overrides] the original complaint and renders it without legal effect.” 9 || (citation modified)). 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 | We ~ FE | f 12 || DATED: July 16, 2025 Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge 13 United States District Court 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28