Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 10, 2025

Dana Soft Pty Ltd v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

Judge
Thomas Hixson
Docket
3:25-cv-03821
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Dana Soft v. Meta, Judge Hixson ordered the clerk to terminate Meta’s motion to dismiss as moot after Dana Soft filed an amended complaint.

Who this affects

Dana Soft Pty Ltd and Meta Platforms, Inc.; the order terminates Meta’s pending motion to dismiss as moot and requires Meta to respond to the amended complaint.

What happened

Dana Soft Pty Ltd sued Meta Platforms, Inc., and Meta filed a motion to dismiss. The case is Dana Soft Pty Ltd v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

Dana Soft then filed an amended complaint on September 10, 2025. The court said a party may amend once without permission within the time allowed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), and that an amended complaint generally replaces the original complaint.

Because Dana Soft had not previously amended its complaint, Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered the clerk to terminate Meta’s pending motion to dismiss as moot. The order also said Meta must respond under Rule 15(a)(3).

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Dana Soft Pty Ltd v. Meta Platforms, Inc. · No. 3:25-cv-03821
Judge
Thomas Hixson
Date
Sept. 10, 2025

Background

Meta Platforms, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss Dana Soft Pty Ltd’s complaint. While that motion was pending, Dana Soft filed an amended complaint on September 10, 2025.

Court’s reasoning

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1) allows a party to amend its pleading once as a matter of course within the time specified by the rule. The court noted that Dana Soft had not previously amended its complaint. It also explained that an amended complaint generally replaces the original complaint and makes the original complaint legally ineffective.

Ruling

The court ordered the Clerk of Court to terminate Meta’s pending motion to dismiss as moot. The order did not decide the merits of that motion. It directed Meta to respond to the amended complaint in compliance with Rule 15(a)(3).

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.