Imperial v. Swift Moving Services, LLC

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
ANTHONY IMPERIAL, 	) 	CASE NO. 4:25-CV-01871
)
Plaintiff, 	)
) 	JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON
v. 	)
)
SWIFT MOVING SERVICES, LLC 	) 	MEMORANDUM OF
) 	OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant. 	) 	[Resolving ECF Nos. 34, 41]
The Court considers two Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 34, 41). Defendant and first
movant is Swift Moving Services, LLC. Plaintiff and second movant is Anthony Imperial. Both
motions are denied for the reasons herein.
A pleading that has been amended under Fed. R. Civ P. 15(a) supersedes the pleading it
modifies. See Clark v. Johnston, 413 Fed.Appx. 804, 811 (6th Cir. 2011). The original pleading
thus becomes inoperative. See Drake v. City of Detroit, Michigan, 266 Fed.Appx. 444, 448 (6th
Cir. 2008). Defendant’s motion to dismiss predates the first amended complaint, which
supersedes the complaint for which dismissal is sought. See ECF Nos. 1, 34, 37. Likewise,
Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss predates the amended answer, complaint, and counterclaim, which
supersedes the complaint for which dismissal is sought. See ECF Nos. 39, 41, 43.
Case: 4:24-cv-01871-BYP Doc #: 44 Filed: 12/16/25 1 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>

(4:25-CV-01871)
2
Consequently, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 34) and Plaintiff’s Motion to
Dismiss (ECF No. 41) are denied without prejudice as moot. See Calvert v. GNC Corp., No.
4:13CV1697 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 30, 2013) (Pearson, J.).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 16, 2025 	/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Date 	Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge
Case: 4:24-cv-01871-BYP Doc #: 44 Filed: 12/16/25 2 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>