Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-cv-00302-JJF Document 9 Filed O9/O4/2008 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
KENNETH W. HOPKINS, )
Plaintiff, ) I
v. ) C.A. No. 08-cv-302 JJF
)
. )
CITY OF WILMINGTON, )
Defendant. )
DEFENDANT CITY OF WILMINGTON’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS
MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 12gb[g6[
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (D.I. 5) is now moot because Plaintiff exercised
his right to file an Amended Complaint. The filing of an “amended complaint renders the
original complaint a legal nullity." Pennsylvania State Troopers Ass ’n v. Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59537, at *1 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 23, 2006) (citing
Snyder v. Pasack Valley Hosp., 303 F.3d 271, 276 (3d Cit. 2002)). “An amended
complaint supersedes the original version in providing the blueprint for the future course
of the lawsuit." Alan Wright, et al., FED. PRAC. AND PROC. § 1476 (2d ed. 1990). "Since
plaintiff filed an amended complaint, its original complaint and all motions related to that
original complaint are moot." Sumito Mitsubishi Silicon Corp. v. Memc Electronic
Materials, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5174, at *2 n.2 (D. Del. Mar. 30, 2005).
Defendant will file a new Motion to Dismiss the claim asserted in the Amended
Complaint within the prescribed time period.
1

Case 1:08-cv-00302-JJF Document 9 Filed O9/O4/2008 Page 2 of 2
DATED: September 4, 2008 CITY OF WILMINGTON
/s/ Gary W. Lipkin
Gary W. Lipkin (Bar I.D. No. 4044)
Assistant City Solicitor
City/County Building
800 N. French Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
302.576.2187
Attorney for Defendant
City of Wilmington
2

Case 1:08-cv-00302-JJF

Document 9

Filed 09/04/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-cv-00302-JJF

Document 9

Filed 09/04/2008

Page 2 of 2