Prine v. LGS Logistics, LLC et al, No. 2:2018cv10714 - Document 9 (E.D. La. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS - IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 4 ) is DENIED as moot, without prejudice to their filing a new motion to dismiss directed at Prine's amended, restated, and superseding complaint. Signed by Judge Barry W Ashe on 2/8/2019. (sa)

Download PDF
Prine v. LGS Logistics, LLC et al Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LANCE W. PRINE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 18-10714 LGS LOGISTICS, LLC, et al. SECTION M (5) ORDER & REASONS Before the Court is a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure filed by defendants Gary Smith, Glen Smith, and Mid-Gulf Recovery Services, LLC (collectively “Defendants”),1 to which plaintiff Lance W. Prine (“Prine”) responds in opposition.2 Prior to filing his memorandum in opposition, Prine filed an amended, restated, and superseding complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.3 “An amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and renders it of no legal effect unless the amended complaint specifically refers to and adopts or incorporates by reference the earlier pleading.” King v. Dogan, 31 F.3d 344, 346 (5th Cir. 1994). “[M]any district courts … routinely deny as moot motions to dismiss that are filed prior to an amendment of a complaint.” Jefferson Cmty. Health Care Ctrs., Inc. v. Jefferson Par. Gov’t, 2016 WL 4429953, at *2 (E.D. La. Aug. 22, 2016) (collecting cases). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED as moot, without prejudice to their filing a new motion to dismiss directed at Prine’s amended, restated, and superseding complaint. 1 R. Doc. 4. R. Doc. 8. 3 R. Doc. 7. 2 Dockets.Justia.com New Orleans, Louisiana, this 8th day of February, 2019. ________________________________ BARRY W. ASHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.