Byrne v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America
Brian Byrne, Charles Sullivan, and Sarah Johnson, individually and as representatives of classes of similarly situated participants in the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America (TIAA) Code Section 401(k) Plan and the TIAA Retirement Plan v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America (TIAA), the TIAA Board of Trustees and its members, the TIAA Plan Investment Review Committee and its members, and John Does 1–30
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:25-cv-04228
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Byrne v. TIAA, Judge Broderick ordered defendants to tell the court whether to treat their pending dismissal motion as moot or evaluate it against the amended complaint.
The defendants must file a letter within 14 days choosing how they want the court to handle their pending motion to dismiss; the plaintiffs’ amended complaint remains the operative pleading for that choice.
What happened
In Brian Byrne, Charles Sullivan, and Sarah Johnson v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September 3, 2025, while the defendants’ motion to dismiss was still pending.
The court gave the defendants two choices: they could ask that the current motion be treated as moot, without prejudice to answering or filing a new motion, or they could ask the court to evaluate the current motion using the amended complaint’s allegations.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the defendants to file a letter making that choice within 14 days. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss or the merits of the case.
The detailed version
- Byrne v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America · No. 1:25-cv-04228
- Vernon Broderick
- Sept. 10, 2025
Background
On September 3, 2025, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). The defendants had already filed a motion to dismiss, and that motion remained pending.
Court’s Order
The court explained that when a plaintiff properly amends a complaint while a motion to dismiss is pending, the court may either deny the pending motion as moot or evaluate it under the allegations in the amended complaint.
The court ordered the defendants to file a letter within 14 days stating which course they wanted the court to take. The defendants could ask the court to deem the current motion moot, without prejudice to filing an answer or a new motion to dismiss under Rule 15(a)(3). Alternatively, they could ask the court to evaluate the current motion in light of the amended complaint.
Effect of the Order
The order did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss, decide whether the amended complaint stated a valid claim, or resolve the underlying dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.