Marathon Petroleum Company LP, et al. v. CMB Petroleum Inc., a California corporation; AMACA Properties LLC, a California limited liability company; DOES 1-10, inclusive.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Benjamin J. Cheeks (author)
Analysis
The court considered Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Defendant Amaca's Motion for Summary Judgment, both of which were pending when the Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint. The court denied both motions as moot because the amended complaint superseded the original complaint, rendering the pending motions concerning the original complaint moot.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 56) denied as moot“Therefore, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 56) and Defendant Amaca’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58).” | agree with court The decision follows the well-established procedural rule that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, rendering pending motions based on the original complaint moot. The order correctly identifies that the FAC was filed while the motions were pending. |
Defendant Amaca's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58) denied as moot“Therefore, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 56) and Defendant Amaca’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58).” | agree with court The decision follows the well-established procedural rule that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, rendering pending motions based on the original complaint moot. The order correctly identifies that the FAC was filed while the motions were pending. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly applies the standard rule that an amended complaint supersedes the original, making pending motions based on the original moot. It cites appropriate Ninth Circuit authority for the supersession rule and a recent district court case for the mootness consequence. The reasoning is direct and legally sound for this procedural posture.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARATHON PETROLEUM Case No.: 24cv1560 BJC- VET COMPANY LP, et al., 12 ORDER DENYING AS MOOT: Plaintiffs, 13 v. (1) PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR 14 PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT CMB PETROLEUM INC., a California 15 [ECF NO. 56] and corporation; AMACA PROPERTIES 16 LLC, a California limited liability (2) DEFENDANT AMACA company; DOES 1-10, inclusive., 17 PROPERTIES’ MOTION FOR Defendants. SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF NO. 18 58] 19 AMACA PROPERTIES LLC, 20 Cross-Claimant, 21 v. 22 CMB PETROLEUM INC., et al, 23 24 Cross-Respondents. 25 26 Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Marathon Petroleum (“Marathon”) and 27 Treasure Franchise Company (“Treasure”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF 28 No. 56) and Defendant/Cross-claimant Amaca Properties, LLC’s (“Amaca”) Motion for 1 || Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58). On August 14, 2026, Plaintiff filed a First Amended 2 ||Complaint (“FAC”). ECF No. 77. 3 “As a general rule, when a plaintiff files an amended complaint, ‘[t]he amended 4 ||complaint supercedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent.’” 5 || Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 6 ||55, 57 (9th Cir.1967)). As a result, “pending motions concerning the original complaint 7 ||must be denied as moot.” Grimes v. S&R Towing, 25-cv-1146-LL-BJW, *2, 2026 WL 8 2048924 (S.D. Cal. July 15, 2026). 9 Here, Plaintiffs have moved for partial summary judgment against Defendant CMB 10 || Petroleum (ECF No. 56) and Defendant Amaca has moved for summary judgment against 11 || Plaintiff (ECF No. 58). Plaintiff has now filed a FAC, making it the operative pleading and 12 original complaint is now “non-existent.” Therefore, the Court DENIES AS MOOT 13 || Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 56) and Defendant Amaca’s 14 || Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58). 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 || Dated: August 17, 2026 17 19 0 Honorable Benjamin J. Cheeks United States District Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28