Deivaprakash v. Conde Nast Digital
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:24-cv-06503
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Deivaprakash v. Condé Nast Digital, Judge Broderick ordered the defendant to choose whether its pending dismissal motion should be treated as moot.
Condé Nast Digital must file a letter within seven days choosing how the court should handle its pending motion to dismiss. The plaintiff’s amended complaint remains the operative pleading discussed in the order.
What happened
In Deivaprakash v. Condé Nast Digital, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint on December 2, 2024, while the defendant’s motion to dismiss was still pending.
The court explained that, after a plaintiff properly amends a complaint, the court may either treat the pending motion as moot or evaluate it using the allegations in the amended complaint.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered Condé Nast Digital to file a letter within seven days stating which option it preferred. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Deivaprakash v. Conde Nast Digital · No. 1:24-cv-06503
- Vernon Broderick
- Dec. 3, 2024
Background
On December 2, 2024, Aaron Deivaprakash filed an amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). Condé Nast Digital had already filed a motion to dismiss, and that motion was still pending.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that when a plaintiff properly amends a complaint while a motion to dismiss remains pending, the court may either deny the pending motion as moot or evaluate the motion based on the allegations in the amended complaint.
Order
The court ordered Condé Nast Digital to file a letter within seven days choosing whether its current motion to dismiss should be deemed moot, without prejudice to filing an answer or a new motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), or whether the court should evaluate the existing motion using the amended complaint. The order did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.