The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
KEVIN YAN LUIS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
-against- Case No. 1:22-cv-06471 (JLR)
MOLTON BROWN USA LLC, ORDER
Defendant.
JENNIFER L. ROCHON, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired
customers and, thus, violates Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C.
§ 12181 et seq. On September 27, 2022, in accordance with the Court’s September 14, 2022
briefing schedule regarding the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 6), Defendant filed a motion to
dismiss the Complaint for lack of jurisdiction. ECF No. 9. On October 18, 2022, Plaintiff filed
an Amended Complaint pursuant to the Court’s September 14, 2022 Order. ECF No. 13.
The Second Circuit has held that “when a plaintiff properly amends her complaint after a
defendant has filed a motion to dismiss that is still pending, the district court has the option of
either denying the pending motion as moot or evaluating the motion in light of the facts alleged
in the amended complaint.” Pettaway v. Nat’l Recovery Sols., LLC, 955 F.3d 299, 303–04 (2d
Cir. 2020) (citing Conforti v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc., 201 F. Supp. 3d 278, 291 (E.D.N.Y. 2016)).
The Second Circuit explained that courts have this option to “promote[] judicial economy by
obviating the need for multiple rounds of briefing addressing complaints that are legally
insufficient.” Id. In this action, Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint in response to
Defendant’s motion to dismiss the original complaint. ECF No. 13. The Court now exercises its
discretion to dismiss the motion to dismiss as moot, without prejudice to refiling it with respect
to the amended complaint.
Additionally, by separate Order today, the Court is referring this case to the assigned
Magistrate Judge for both for General Pretrial Purposes, including settlement.
In addition, to conserve resources, to promote judicial efficiency, and in an effort to
achieve a faster disposition of this matter, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties must discuss
whether they are willing to consent, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to conducting all further
proceedings before the assigned Magistrate Judge. If all parties so consent, counsel shall file on
ECF a fully executed Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge
form, available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/forms/consent-proceed-us-
magistrate-judge.
If the parties do so, and the Court so orders the form, all further proceedings will then be
conducted before the assigned Magistrate Judge rather than before the undersigned. There will
be no adverse consequences if the parties do not consent to proceed before the Magistrate Judge.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion pending at ECF No. 9.
Dated: October 19, 2022
New York, New York
SO ORDERED.
United States District Judge