American GreenFuels Rockwood v. AIK Chuan Construction PTE. Ltd.
American GreenFuels Rockwood (Tennessee), LLC v. AIK Chuan Construction PTE. Ltd.
- Denise Cote
- 1:21-cv-07680
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In American GreenFuels v. AIK Chuan, Judge Broderick required a letter about whether to treat a pending counterclaim-dismissal motion as moot.
AIK Chuan Construction PTE. Ltd., Kolmar Americas, Inc., and American GreenFuels Rockwood (Tennessee), LLC; the Counterclaim Defendants were ordered to file a letter by May 2, 2022.
What happened
In American GreenFuels Rockwood (Tennessee), LLC v. AIK Chuan Construction PTE. Ltd., AIK Chuan filed amended counterclaims on April 22, 2022.
The amendment occurred while Counterclaim Defendants Kolmar Americas, Inc. and American GreenFuels had a motion to dismiss the counterclaims pending.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the Counterclaim Defendants to file a letter by May 2, 2022, stating whether the court should treat their motion as moot and let them file a new motion, or decide the existing motion using the amended counterclaims.
The detailed version
- American GreenFuels Rockwood v. AIK Chuan Construction PTE. Ltd. · No. 1:21-cv-07680
- Denise Cote
- Apr. 25, 2022
Background
AIK Chuan Construction PTE. Ltd., the counterclaimant, filed amended counterclaims on April 22, 2022, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). Kolmar Americas, Inc. and American GreenFuels Rockwood (Tennessee), LLC, the counterclaim defendants, already had a motion to dismiss the counterclaims pending.
Order
The court explained that when a pleading is properly amended while a motion to dismiss remains pending, the court may either deny the pending motion as moot or evaluate it using the allegations in the amended pleading. The court ordered the Counterclaim Defendants to file a letter by May 2, 2022, stating which approach the court should take: deem the current motion moot and allow a new motion under Rule 15(a)(3), or evaluate the current motion in light of the amended counterclaims.
Result
This order did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss. It required the Counterclaim Defendants to inform the court how they wanted the court to handle the pending motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.