William A. Hashem, Rosalva Hashem, Plaintiffs-appellants, v. Ricardo Yglesias, Roman Cardenas, Emil Hashem, Richardellis, Defendants-appellees, 972 F.2d 1339 (9th Cir. 1992)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Rosalva Hashem and her son, William, appeal the district court's order dismissing their second amended complaint with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) (5). We have carefully reviewed the record. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court at the May 17, 1991, hearing. The Hashems failed to satisfy their burden to establish that service of the second amended complaint was effective.

The Hashems also appeal the district court's earlier order dismissing their first amended complaint with leave to amend for lack of personal jurisdiction. This order is not before us. After the district court dismissed the first amended complaint, the Hashems had the option of amending their complaint or foregoing that opportunity and appealing. They chose to amend. Once an amended pleading is interposed, the prior pleading no longer performs any function in the case. See, e.g., Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner and Co., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990); Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967).

We decline Yglesias' and Cardenas' request to impose sanctions.

AFFIRMED.