Branson v. Slentz et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
RONALD RAY BRANSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. CIV-25-688-G
)
CITY OF NEWCASTLE, OKLAHOMA, )
et al., )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER
Now before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11), jointly filed by a current
and a former defendant and seeking dismissal of the claims raised in Plaintiff’s Complaint
(Doc. No. 1). Plaintiff has now timely filed an Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 15).
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint supersedes the original Complaint and renders it of no legal
effect. See Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp., 929 F.2d 1515, 1517 (10th Cir. 1991).
Accordingly, the pending Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of September, 2025.
Case 5:25-cv-00688-G Document 17 Filed 09/15/25 Page 1 of 1