Simon J. Burchett Photography, Inc. v. Alibaba Group Inc.
- Louis Stanton
- 1:23-cv-09853
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Simon J. Burchett Photography v. Alibaba Group, Judge Stanton allowed a third amended complaint and dismissed two pending motions as moot.
Simon J. Burchett Photography, Inc. may file and serve a Third Amended Complaint. The defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and the plaintiff’s request for permission to amend that complaint were dismissed as moot, and the defendants may seek dismissal of the Third Amended Complaint without a pre-motion conference.
What happened
Simon J. Burchett Photography, Inc. sued Alibaba Group (U.S.) Inc. and others. The plaintiff sought to file a Third Amended Complaint while the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint was pending.
The court allowed the plaintiff to file and serve the Third Amended Complaint without a prior conference. Because the new complaint replaces the earlier complaints, the court dismissed the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and the plaintiff’s pending request for permission to amend as moot.
Judge Louis L. Stanton also allowed the defendants to seek dismissal of the Third Amended Complaint without first requesting a pre-motion conference. The order did not decide whether the claims in the Third Amended Complaint were legally sufficient.
The detailed version
- Simon J. Burchett Photography, Inc. v. Alibaba Group Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-09853
- Louis Stanton
- Feb. 23, 2024
Background
The plaintiff sought to file and serve a Third Amended Complaint. At the time, the defendants had a pending motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, and the plaintiff had a pending request for permission to amend the Second Amended Complaint.
Ruling
The court allowed the plaintiff to file and serve the Third Amended Complaint without a prior conference. Because that complaint replaces the earlier complaints, the court ruled that the defendants’ pending motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and the plaintiff’s pending request for permission to amend the Second Amended Complaint were moot. The court therefore dismissed both motions as moot.
Effect of the Order
The defendants received permission to move to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint without a pre-motion conference. The endorsement does not decide the merits of the claims or whether the Third Amended Complaint states legally sufficient claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.