Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Order Denying Motion to Dismiss as Moot [51] — No. 2:23-cv-00999 (Dkt. 60, C.D. Cal.)

Order Denying Motion to Dismiss as Moot [51] — No. 2:23-cv-00999 (Dkt. 60, C.D. Cal.)

Summary

An order by United States District Judge Otis D. Wright, II in Jane Roe 6 et al. v. International Churches of Christ, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00999-ODW (PLAx), in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, dated June 23, 2023. It states that on May 31, 2023 defendants Alberto Schirmer and Anna Maria Schirmer moved to dismiss the complaint of plaintiffs Jane Roe 6 and Jane Roe 7 under Rule 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 51), and that on June 16, 2023 the plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 57) within the twenty-one days allowed by Rule 15(a)(1). Because the motion addresses a complaint that is no longer operative, the Court denies it as moot.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Order Denying Motion to Dismiss as Moot [51] — No. 2:23-cv-00999 (Dkt. 60, C.D. Cal.).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/order-denying-motion-to-dismiss-as-moot-51-no-2-23-cv-00999-dkt-60-c-d-784712f42f/, SHA-256 c33388fc7c90b3a278009001ed470db6e88ff999fc3a9e4916ce458fbe486632.

Full text

Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 60 Filed 06/23/23 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:465




 1                                                                                O
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8                        United States District Court
 9                        Central District of California
10
11   JANE ROE 6 et al.                     Case № 2:23-cv-00999-ODW (PLAx)

12                       Plaintiffs,       ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
                                           DISMISS AS MOOT [51]
13         v.
14
     INTERNATIONAL CHURCHES OF
15   CHRIST, INC. et al.,
16
                         Defendants.
17
18   ///
19   ///
20   ///
21   ///
22   ///
23   ///
24   ///
25   ///
26   ///
27   ///
28   ///
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 60 Filed 06/23/23 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:466




 1         On May 31, 2023, Defendants Alberto Schirmer and Anna Maria Schirmer filed
 2   a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Jane Roe 6 and Jane Roe 7’s Complaint pursuant to
 3   Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 51.) On June 16, 2023,
 4   Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint, less than twenty-one days after
 5   Defendants filed their motion. (ECF No. 57.) Rule 15(a)(1) allows Plaintiffs to file
 6   an amended complaint once as a matter of course within twenty-one days of service of
 7   a Rule 12(b) motion. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ amended complaint was proper under the
 8   Rules. As the pending motion to dismiss is based on a complaint that is no longer
 9   operative, the motion is DENIED as MOOT. (ECF No. 51.) See Ramirez v. Cnty. of
10   San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015).
11
12         IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
14         June 23, 2023
15
16                              ____________________________________
17                                       OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
                                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28




                                              2

File and source

File
60.pdf
Size
136,534 bytes
SHA-256
c33388fc7c90b3a278009001ed470db6e88ff999fc3a9e4916ce458fbe486632
Our copy
60.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top