The opinion of the court was delivered by: Scullin, Senior Judge
Plaintiff Timothy W. Hanrahan, Jr. commenced this action by filing a civil rights complaint on June 8, 2007. See Dkt. No. 1. In his pro se complaint, Plaintiff alleged that, while he was an inmate in the Herkimer County Correctional Facility ("HCCF"), employees of that facility, as well as two individuals from Herkimer County Mental Health, Defendant Dr. Menon and Defendant Edgar Scudder, were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs.*fn2 See id. Plaintiff claimed that Herkimer County Mental Health, which had the responsibility to treat mental health problems at HCCF, denied him treatment and medications. See id. at ¶¶ 1-5.
On March 11, 2008, Defendant Dr. Menon filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing only that she was not personally involved in Plaintiff's care. See Dkt. No. 20. By Report-Recommendation filed on March 5, 2009, Magistrate Judge DiBianco recommended that this Court deny Defendant Dr. Menon's motion without prejudice because the evidence submitted showed that "there [were] genuine issues of material fact in dispute about Dr. Menon's personal involvement" in making decisions regarding Plaintiff's care. See Dkt. No. 42 at 12. Currently before the Court are Defendant Dr. Menon's objections to that recommendation. See Dkt. No. 44.*fn3
Before this Court had the opportunity to review Defendant Dr. Menon's objections, Plaintiff moved to amend his complaint. See Dkt. No. 48. In his motion to amend, Plaintiff requested permission to add "Capt. McGrail, Superintendent, Herkimer County Correctional Facility;" "Shannon Urtz, RN, Medical Department, Herkimer County Correctional Facility;" and "Hon. Christopher Farber, Policymaker for Herkimer County Correctional Facility" as defendants to this action and to assert allegations of wrongdoing against them in relation to Plaintiff's claim that, during his incarceration at HCCF beginning in April 2007, Defendants denied him mental health treatment in deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs.
In a Memorandum-Decision and Order dated January 21, 2010, this Court granted his motion. See Dkt. No. 58. The Court also instructed the Clerk of the Court to "file the approved proposed amended complaint... as the Amended Complaint, which will supersede and replace in toto the original complaint...." See id. at 5. In addition, the Court ordered Defendant Dr. Menon, among others, "to respond to the amended complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order." See id. at 6. Defendant Dr. Menon filed her answer to the amended complaint on February 5, 2010. See Dkt. No. 65.
In light of the fact that the Court granted Plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint and that his amended complaint has replaced his original complaint in its entirety, Defendant Dr. Menon's motion for summary judgment, directed as it was to the original complaint, is now moot. Accordingly, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge DiBianco's March 5, 2009 Report-Recommendation is REJECTED because the motion that it addressed is now moot; and the Court further
ORDERS that this matter is remanded to Magistrate Judge Baxter for all further pretrial matters.