05/15/2018

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
CHARLOTTESVILLE DIVISION

BRENNAN M. GILMORE, )
)
Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 3:18cv00017
)
v. ) ORDER
)
ALEXANDER E. JONES, et al., ) Judge Norman K. Moon
)
Defendants. )

There are several motions pending in this case. The motions to dismiss the original

complaint (dkts 15, 25) are DENIED as moot because the Plaintiff has filed a substantively

amended complaint. See Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 572 (4th Cir. 2001) (“As

a general rule, an amended pleading ordinarily supersedes the original and renders it of no legal

effect.”); Chandler v. Cheesecake Factory Restaurants, Inc., 239 F.R.D. 432, 440 n.5 (M.D.N.C.

2006) (“It is black letter law that when the parties amend the pleadings, the amended pleadings

supersede the original pleadings; thus a motion to dismiss directed at a pleading that is no longer

operative becomes moot.”).

Plaintiff moves (with the consent of Defendants Alexander Jones, InfoWars LLC, Free

Speech Systems, and Lee Ann McAdoo) for establishment of a consolidated, extended briefing

scheduling to facilitate the orderly and efficient adjudication of motions to dismiss expected to

be filed in this multi-defendant case. (Dkt. 32). Defendants Stranahan and Hoft oppose the

motion as it applies to them, arguing that the case—which was filed less than two months ago—

has already gone on too long. Defendants Stranahan and Hoft also move for leave to file a

surreply in opposition to the briefing schedule, and the Court GRANTS that motion for leave.

(Dkt. 35).

Case 3:18-cv-00017-NKM Document 52 Filed 05/15/18 Page 1 of 3 Pageid#: 1066

 As for Plaintiff’s motion for a briefing schedule, it too is GRANTED because a

consolidated briefing schedule would facilitate an expeditious and orderly resolution of the

issues. It is therefore ORDERED as follows:

1) Any motions to dismiss the amended complaint by Defendants Jones, McAdoo,

InforWars, and Free Speech Systems are due on or before May 22, 2018.

2) Plaintiff’s consolidated response thereto (and to the motion to dismissed recently filed by

Defendants Hoff, Stranahan, Creighton, Wilburn, Hickford, and Word-N-Ideas) is due on

or before June 19, 2018.

3) Reply briefs in support of the above-mentioned motions to dismiss are due on or before

July 10, 2018. No surreplies will be permitted without leave of court.

4) Regarding Defendant West (who neither joined nor opposed Plaintiff’s motion but whose

responsive pleading or motion, according to his waiver of service, dkt. 21, is also due on

May 22, 2018), if he files a motion to dismiss on or before May 22, the briefing deadlines

in Paragraphs (2) and (3) above shall apply.

Finally, the Court will separately enter its standard proposed pretrial order. Among other things,

that order sets scheduling and briefing deadlines that shall apply to this case going forward (with

the exception of briefing deadlines created by this Order). Additionally, the pretrial order

provides page limitations on filings made by the parties, unless leave of court is obtained for a

larger submission. The Court notes that the initial complaint in this case contained 198

paragraphs in 61 pages, the amended complaint contains 293 paragraphs spanning 97 pages, and

a recently-filed brief in support of several defendants’ motion to dismiss is 106 pages long. In

making future submissions, the Court encourages the parties to consider how to both effectively

and succinctly present their positions.

2
Case 3:18-cv-00017-NKM Document 52 Filed 05/15/18 Page 2 of 3 Pageid#: 1067
 The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to counsel.

Entered this _____

15th day of May, 2018.

3
Case 3:18-cv-00017-NKM Document 52 Filed 05/15/18 Page 3 of 3 Pageid#: 1068