ORDER - Because Plaintiff timely filed an Amended Complaint after the filing of the Motion to Dismiss, the Court DENIES Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 15 ) as MOOT, given that the originally filed complaint has been superseded. It is so ORDERED. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. Signed by District Judge Roderick C. Young on 1/20/2026. (ewat, ) (Entered: 01/20/2026)

The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss as moot on January 20, 2026, after the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. District Judge Roderick C. Young ruled that the original complaint was superseded by the amended version, rendering the motion to dismiss irrelevant.

The defendant had filed the motion to dismiss before the plaintiff amended the complaint. The court's order does not address the merits of the defendant's arguments but focuses solely on procedural grounds. The case remains active with the amended complaint now controlling the proceedings.

The next steps will likely involve the defendant responding to the amended complaint or filing a new motion addressing it directly. The docket number for the motion to dismiss was 15, but that motion is no longer operative. The court has not set a schedule for further briefing or hearings following the amended complaint's filing.