Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled May 29, 2024

Salazar v. Victoria's Secret & Co.

Judge
Maxine Chesney
Docket
3:23-cv-06654
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Salazar v. Victoria's Secret & Co., Judge Chesney denied as moot the motion to dismiss after Salazar filed an amended complaint.

Who this affects

Vivian Salazar and Victoria's Secret & Co.; the motion to dismiss the initial complaint was denied as moot, and the scheduled hearing was vacated.

What happened

In Salazar v. Victoria's Secret & Co., the company asked the court to dismiss Salazar's initial class-action complaint under federal rules governing jurisdiction and legal sufficiency.

Salazar filed a First Amended Class Action Complaint on May 22, 2024, within 21 days after the company served its motion to dismiss. The court explained that she was therefore allowed to amend her complaint without permission.

Because the amended complaint replaced the initial complaint, Judge Maxine M. Chesney denied the motion to dismiss as moot and vacated the scheduled hearing.

The detailed version

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

Case
Salazar v. Victoria's Secret & Co. · No. 3:23-cv-06654
Judge
Maxine Chesney
Date
May 29, 2024

Background

Victoria's Secret & Co. moved to dismiss Vivian Salazar's initial class-action complaint on May 8, 2024, under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 12(b)(1) concerns subject-matter jurisdiction, and Rule 12(b)(6) concerns whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim.

On May 22, 2024, Salazar filed a First Amended Class Action Complaint. The court found that she filed it within 21 days after service of the motion to dismiss and was entitled to amend her pleading once without permission under Rule 15(a)(1).

Ruling

The court explained that an amended complaint replaces the original complaint, which no longer has legal effect. It therefore denied as moot Victoria's Secret & Co.'s motion to dismiss the initial complaint. The court also vacated the hearing scheduled for June 21, 2024. The order did not decide the merits of the claims in the amended complaint.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.