2:15-cv-12013-AJT-DRG Doc # 11 Filed 07/30/15 Pg 1 of 5

Pg ID 136

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
MATTHEW FINSTON,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 15-12013

Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow

TAYLOR CHRISTOFFERSEN, SAMUEL

CHARLES CARY, BRADY FARRELL,
ADDISON BRADLEY BACHMAN, and
CX3 HOLDINGS, LLC,
Defendants.
_______________________________________/
RESPONSE TO BRADY FARRELLS MOTION TO DISMISS

2:15-cv-12013-AJT-DRG Doc # 11 Filed 07/30/15 Pg 2 of 5

Pg ID 137

Statement of Issue Presented

Whether Defendant Brady Farrells Motion to Dismiss should be denied without

prejudice because it is rendered moot by Plaintiff Matthew Finstons First Amended
Complaint.

2:15-cv-12013-AJT-DRG Doc # 11 Filed 07/30/15 Pg 3 of 5

Controlling Legal Authority

FED. R. CIV. P. 15(a)(1)(B)

Bancoult v. McNamara, 214 F.R.D. 5 (D.D.C. 2003)

ii

Pg ID 138

2:15-cv-12013-AJT-DRG Doc # 11 Filed 07/30/15 Pg 4 of 5

Pg ID 139

On July 10, 2015, Defendant Brady Farrell filed a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule
12(b) as his initial responsive pleading. (Dckt. No. 7.) On July 30, 2015, Plaintiff Matthew
Finston timely filed his First Amended Complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1)(B) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows Finston to file his First Amended Complaint 21 days
after service of a motion under Rule 12(b). FED. R. CIV. P. 15(a)(1)(B).
The First Amended Complaint supersedes the original complaint, rendering it a nullity.
See Drake v. City of Detroit, 266 F. Appx 444, 448 (6th Cir. 2008). An amended complaint
filed after a motion to dismiss has been filed renders the motion to dismiss moot. Barnes v.
Birds Eye Foods LLC, No. 10-541, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69579 (W.D. Mich. July 12, 2010)
(citing Bancoult v. McNamara, 214 F.R.D. 5, 13 (D.D.C. 2003) (Because the original complaint
now is superseded by the amended complaint, the court denies without prejudice all pending
motions pertaining to the original complaint.).)
WHEREFORE, Finston respectfully requests that this Court deny Defendant Samuel
Carys Motion to Dismiss without prejudice.
Respectfully submitted,
BOYLE BURDETT

Dated: July 30, 2015

By:/s/H. William Burdett, Jr.

Eugene H. Boyle, Jr. (P42023)
H. William Burdett, Jr. (P63185)
14950 East Jefferson, Suite 200
Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan 48230
(313) 344-4000
burdett@boyleburdett.com
Attorneys for Matthew Finston

2:15-cv-12013-AJT-DRG Doc # 11 Filed 07/30/15 Pg 5 of 5

Pg ID 140

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
MATTHEW FINSTON,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 15-12013

v.

Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow

TAYLOR CHRISTOFFERSEN, SAMUEL

CHARLES CARY, BRADY FARRELL,
ADDISON BRADLEY BACHMAN, and
CX3 HOLDINGS, LLC,
Defendants.
_______________________________________/
Proof of Service
I, H. William Burdett, Jr., certify that on July 30, 2015, I filed the Response to Brady
Farrells Motion to Dismiss with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system. I further certify
that on July 30, 2015, I served a copy of the First Amended Complaint by electronic and United
States Mail upon:
Brady Farrell
32203 North 16th Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85085
bpfarrell55@gmail.com

Samuel Charles Cary

5802 Windcliff Court
Katy, Texas 77449
samcary777@gmail.com
/s/H. William Burdett, Jr.
H. William Burdett, Jr. (P63185)
Boyle Burdett
14950 East Jefferson, Suite 200
Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan 48230
(313) 344-4000
burdett@boyleburdett.com
Attorneys for Matthew Finston