Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS"

Transcription

1 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KRIS W. KOBACH, et al. Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:13-CV-4095-EFM-DJW UNITED STATES ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION, et al., Defendants. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO LIMIT COURT S REVIEW TO THE AGENCY RECORD, TO LIMIT THE FEBRUARY 11-12, 2014 HEARING TO ORAL ARGUMENT, AND TO HOLD A STATUS CONFERENCE, AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF Defendants United States Election Assistance Commission ( EAC ) and Alice Miller, Acting Executive Director of the EAC, respectfully move: (1) to limit the Court s review of the EAC s final agency action in this matter, ECF No , to the administrative record, ECF Nos. 79, 80, 95, 82, 132; (2) to limit the previously noticed February 11-12, 2014, hearing, ECF No. 131, to oral argument; and (3) to hold a telephone status conference. 1 In support of their motion, Defendants state as follows: INTRODUCTION This case involves a straightforward challenge to agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C ( APA ). Plaintiffs Arizona and Kansas (collectively, Plaintiffs or States ) requested that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission ( EAC ) amend 1 Counsel for the Defendants have notified the other parties of Defendants intention to file this motion. Counsel for Plaintiffs indicated that they opposed cancellation of the evidentiary hearing. Counsel for the ITCA, Project Vote, and Valle del Sol groups of Defendant-Intervenors indicated that they join in the motion as to the relief requested, but reserve the right to take different positions on the specific issues that the Defendants raise. Counsel for the League of Women Voters group of Defendant-Intervenors indicated that they take no position on the motion. 1

2 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 2 of 13 the National Mail Voter Registration Form ( Federal Form ) to require that registrants for federal elections in those states provide additional proof of their United States citizenship as a precondition to voter registration. The EAC, through its Acting Executive Director, originally opted to defer ruling on those requests until a quorum of EAC commissioners was established. But on December 13, the Court found that the EAC had unreasonably delayed acting on the States requests and remand[ed] the matter to the EAC with instructions that it render a final agency action no later than January 17, Order of Dec. 13, 2013, ECF No. 114, at 2. In accordance with the Court s order, the agency issued a decision on January 17, 2014, rejecting the States requests. ECF No That decision is now subject to judicial review pursuant to well-settled APA principles and procedures. Specifically, the APA empowers the Court to examine the administrative record submitted by the EAC and determine whether the agency s decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law. 5 U.S.C. 706(2)(A). The Court cannot, consistent with controlling Supreme Court and Tenth Circuit authority, render a decision based on a new record made initially in the reviewing court. Bar MK Ranches v. Yuetter, 994 F.2d 735, 739 (10th Cir. 1993) (quoting Camp v. Pitts, 411 U.S. 138, 142 (1973)). In light of this bedrock APA principle, Defendants respectfully request that the Court cancel the evidentiary hearing it has scheduled for February 11-12, Instead, the Court should limit its review to the administrative record, the arguments presented by the parties in their briefs due on January 31 and February 7, see Order of Jan. 22, 2014, ECF No. 130, and any oral argument the Court wishes to hear. At a minimum, prior to ordering an evidentiary hearing, the Court should require, first, that any party demonstrate in its brief supporting a petition for review of the final agency 2

3 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 3 of 13 decision (which is due January 31, see ECF No. 130) that its attempt to supplement the agency s record fits under one of the limited exceptions to APA record review, identifying the specific ways in which the record needs to be supplemented. If this Court finds, after reviewing the parties briefs, that there are legitimate reasons to consider evidence beyond the administrative record, it should at that point direct the agency to supplement the record as needed or, if appropriate, provide for a reasonable discovery period and an evidentiary hearing with respect to the limited scope of issues for which the Court determines that supplementation of the record is necessary. The current path that the Court has ordered an evidentiary hearing to occur only three weeks after the Court s January 22 Scheduling Order and only four days after the parties have completed their briefing is both contrary to Supreme Court and Tenth Circuit precedent for APA cases and, in its timing, unfairly prejudicial to the Defendants. Defendants respectfully request that the Court reconsider its approach and adhere to customary and required procedures for reviewing agency action. 2 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Court heard oral argument on Plaintiffs preliminary injunction motion on December 13, After concluding that the EAC had unreasonably delayed action on Plaintiffs requests within the meaning of the APA, Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 76:6, the Court determined that under [its] procedural rules, [it] need[ed] a final agency action, id. at 140:19-20, and appeared to accept defense counsel s representation that even in the absence of any commissioners, the EAC can consider and act upon the States requests. December 13, 2013 Order, ECF No Given the press of time, Defendants ask, in the alternative, that if the Court decides to proceed with a twoday evidentiary hearing starting on February 11, it schedule a telephone status conference to take place on or before February 3, 2014, to discuss the conduct of the hearing (e.g., the number of witnesses it will hear, the time allotted to each party for oral argument, etc.), the timeframe for disclosing witnesses and evidence, and the terms and conditions of any pre-hearing discovery. 3

4 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 4 of 13 at 1-2. Consistent with well-settled principles of administrative law, the Court remanded the matter to the EAC with instructions to render a final agency decision. Id. On December 19, 2013, the EAC issued a Notice and Request for Public Comment on the states requests. 78 Fed. Reg (Dec. 24, 2013). In addition to publishing that notice in the Federal Register and on the EAC s website, the agency sent it directly to the parties to this case and to its list of NVRA stakeholders. See Memorandum Of Decision Concerning State Requests To Include Additional Proof-Of-Citizenship Instructions On The National Mail Voter Registration Form (Docket No. EAC ), ECF No at 5. In response, the EAC received 423 public comments, including detailed comments from Plaintiffs and all Defendant- Intervenors. Id. On January 17, 2014, after reviewing the 1,912-page record, including all of the public comments, as well as the governing law, the EAC issued a 46-page decision denying the States requests. Specifically, the agency determined, in accordance with Section 9 of the [National Voter Registration Act] and EAC regulations and precedent, that additional proof of citizenship is not necessary * * * to enable the appropriate State election official to assess the eligibility of the applicant, cf. 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-7(b)(1), and will not be required by the Federal Form for registration for federal elections. ECF No at 45. The EAC filed that final agency decision with the Court on January 17, 2014, id., and filed the supporting, certified administrative record on January 25, 2014, ECF Nos. 132 and 133. This filing supplemented the earlier administrative record filed on November 25 and December 4, ECF Nos. 79, 80, 82, and 95. 4

5 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 5 of 13 ARGUMENT I. THE COURT S REVIEW IS LIMITED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD. A. This Proceeding is Governed by the APA s Procedures for Judicial Review. Plaintiffs claims arise under the APA s judicial review provisions, 5 U.S.C ECF No. 1, Compl Judicial review thereunder is generally based on the full administrative record that was before * * * the decision maker[]. Bar MK Ranches, 994 F.2d at 739 (citing Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 420 (1971)). Thus, the focal point for judicial review [under the APA] should be the administrative record already in existence, not some new record made initially in the reviewing court. Bar MK Ranches, 994 F.2d at 739 (citing Camp v. Pitts, 411 U.S. 138, 142 (1973)); see also Citizens for Alternatives to Radioactive Dumping v. U.S. Department of Energy, 485 F.3d 1091, 1096 (10th Cir. 2007) (hereinafter CARD ) (same). The reviewing court must apply the appropriate APA standard of review, 5 U.S.C. 706, to the agency decision based on the record the agency presents to the reviewing court. Florida Power & Light Co. v. Lorion, 470 U.S. 729, (1985) (citation omitted). The reviewing court is not generally empowered to conduct a de novo inquiry into the matter, Sierra Club v. Hodel, 848 F.2d 1068, 1093 (10th Cir. 1988), overruled on other grounds by Vill. of Los Ranchos De Albuquerque v. Marsh, 956 F.2d 970 (10th Cir. 1992), and parties are 3 Counts I-IV of the Complaint, ECF No. 1, Compl , specifically incorporate the APA. Although Count V of the Complaint purports to raise a separate constitutional claim under the Tenth Amendment, see id , that claim is already subsumed in Count II of the Complaint, which asks the Court to set aside agency action found to be contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity. See 5 U.S.C. 706(2)(B). Additionally, the Court specifically indicated at oral argument (in response to the EAC counsel s argument that the case really has nothing to do with the Tenth Amendment ) that it did not find the Tenth Amendment as particularly determining of the issues before the Court. Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 83: Additionally, for the reasons discussed in their November 21, 2013 and November 27, 2013 briefs, Defendants believe this case is ripe for a decision on the merits under the APA and that a preliminary injunction proceeding would not be proper at this juncture. See ECF No. 68 1; ECF No. 92 at The Court appeared to acknowledge this at the December 13 hearing. See Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 143:3-5 ( [A]lthough [plaintiffs] filed for preliminary injunction, I ve really considered this as more of a mandamus or administrative review case.... ). 5

6 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 6 of 13 not * * * ordinarily entitled to augment the agency s record with either discovery or testimony presented in the district court. Rempfer v. Sharfstein, 583 F.3d 860, 865 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (stating that in APA action, [t]he entire case on review is a question of law, and the complaint, properly read, actually presents no factual allegations, but rather only arguments about the legal conclusion to be drawn about the agency action ) (internal quotations omitted). The Tenth Circuit, in recognition of these governing principles, has instructed that [r]eviews of agency action in the district courts must be processed as appeals. Olenhouse v. Commodity Credit Corp., 42 F.3d 1560, (10th Cir. 1994) (emphasis in original); see also Rempfer, 583 F.3d at 865 (district court sits as an appellate tribunal on a review of an agency s action under the APA). The Tenth Circuit disapproves of district court procedures that invite[] (even require) the reviewing court to rely on evidence outside the administrative record and has explicitly prohibit[ed] it. Olenhouse, 42 F.3d at ; see also American Mining Congress v. Thomas, 772 F.2d 617, 626 (10th Cir. 1985) ( [An] agency s action must be reviewed on the basis articulated by the agency and on the evidence and proceedings before the agency at the time it acted. Aggressive use of extra-record materials * * * would run directly counter to the admonitions of the Supreme Court. ) (emphasis added); Sierra Club v. Hodel, 848 F.2d at 1093 ( The reviewing court is not generally empowered to conduct a de novo inquiry into the matter[.] ) (citing Florida Power & Light Co., 470 U.S. at 744); Heber Valley Milk Co. v. Butz, 503 F.2d 96, 97 (10th Cir. 1974) ( it is the duty of the trial court to examine the record as made before the administrative agency in APA judicial review proceedings) (emphasis added). This Court s own local rules comport with Olenhouse by stating that the record on review [of an agency action] * * * is comprised of: (A) the order sought to be reviewed or enforced; (B) the findings or report on which it is based; and (C) the pleadings, evidence, and 6

7 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 7 of 13 proceedings before the agency. D. Kan. L.R (b)(1) (emphasis added). See also Reitz v. USDA, SAC, 2010 WL (D. Kan. Mar. 4, 2010) (Crow, J.) (same) (citing D. Kan. L.R (b)(1)). [O]nly in extremely limited circumstances, such as where the agency ignored relevant factors it should have considered[,] * * * considered factors left out of the formal record, or where there is a strong showing of bad faith or improper behavior should a court consider materials outside of the record. CARD, 485 F.3d at 1096 (quoting Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, 401 U.S. at 420) (denying request to supplement administrative record) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also American Mining Cong., 772 F.2d at 626 ( Thus, any exception to this general rule against the use of extra-record materials must be extremely limited. ). B. There Is No Basis for Going Beyond the Administrative Record in This Case. No party has invoked, much less demonstrated the applicability of, any of the limited exceptions to the principle of APA record review. (In fact, no party has yet petitioned the Court for review of the final agency decision.) If any party argues in its petition for review due January 31, 2014 that one of the exceptions applies, Defendants will respond in their filing due February 7, For now, Defendants simply note that none of the limited exceptions would appear to apply. During its review, the EAC cast a wide net by choosing to seek public comments on the States requests. The agency received 423 public comments reflecting a broad range of views, and it carefully considered those comments and any accompanying factual information. The EAC also analyzed the applicable law, including the NVRA and its legislative history, the Supreme Court s decision in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., U.S., 133 S. Ct (2013), and the agency s own regulations, policies and practices. 7

8 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 8 of 13 There is nothing to suggest that the EAC ignored relevant factors, considered factors left out of the record, or engaged in bad faith or improper behavior. It properly exercised its discretionary authority, as delegated by Congress and ordered by the Court, to decide the States requests. Assuming that the EAC s decision is in fact challenged on January 31, 4 the Court must then determine whether the EAC s decision was arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law and it must make that determination based on the EAC s administrative record, not on some new record developed in the reviewing court. C. Inter Tribal Council Confirms that Ordinary APA Review Principles Apply In This Case. Any contention that this case mandates a different review process is foreclosed by the Supreme Court s decision in Inter Tribal Council. In that case, the Court found that no constitutional doubt [was] raised by requiring states to accept and use the Federal Form because the states had the alternative remedy of asking the EAC to add the contested documentary proof of citizenship instructions and challeng[ing] the EAC s rejection of that request in a suit under the Administrative Procedure Act, see 5 U.S.C Inter Tribal Council, 133 S. Ct. at 2259 (emphasis added). If the EAC failed to act on the request, then the Court indicated that the state would have the opportunity to establish in a reviewing court that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirement. Id. at 2260 (citing 5 U.S.C. 706(1)). Nothing in this passage suggests that the Court intended to upend the procedures for review under the APA established by long-settled precedent. Indeed, the Court s citation to the APA following that passage strongly suggests otherwise. 4 While the Court retained jurisdiction over this case in anticipation of further proceedings, see Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 141:2-5, it is important to note that no party has yet challenged the EAC s final action, much less suggested that any supplementation of the record was necessary. 8

9 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 9 of 13 At the December 13 oral argument, this Court contemplated a situation in which the EAC was unable to act due to a lack of a quorum of commissioners and suggested that the duty of the States to establish the necessity of the citizenship documentation requirement might then flow to a reviewing court. Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 29: But under normal situations, the Court observed, the states would have to establish that a mere oath would not suffice before the EAC. Id. (emphasis added). As clarified later in the hearing, and as discussed in detail in the EAC s Memorandum of Decision, the EAC staff was authorized to take final action on Plaintiffs requests, even in the absence of a quorum of commissioners, and it in fact did so on January 17, 2014, in accordance with this Court s remand order. Id. at 140:15-22 ( I have to find that we don t have a final agency action, because the agency has deferred decision. I thought they deferred decision because they had to. [EAC s counsel] argues that they don t. I m reluctantly concluding that, under our procedural rules, we need a final agency action, and I m going to remand this to the EAC with the instructions that they render a final agency action. ); ECF No. 114 (written remand order); ECF No at (discussing the EAC s ability to act on the requests in the absence of a quorum of commissioners). Therefore, this Court is in the normal situation of reviewing an administrative determination under the APA, based on the record developed before the agency. 5 5 Plaintiffs have never contended, either before this Court or before the EAC, that the agency lacked authority, in the absence of commissioners, to take action on their requests. Nor have Plaintiffs contended that any evidence is necessary, other than showing that their requests for modifications to the Federal Form s state-specific instructions arise from the enactment of state laws that deem additional proof of United States citizenship to be necessary. See Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 31:17-23 ( So our position is this. All we have to do, whether before the EAC or before the reviewing court... is establish... that under our laws it [additional proof of citizenship] has officially been deemed necessary to effectuate the proof of citizenship [qualification] and that an oath is not sufficient. ); EAC ( Accordingly, the fact that the Kansas Legislature determined that concrete proof of citizenship is necessary to enforce Kansas s citizenship requirement is the only showing Kansas must make to establish that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirement. ) Rather, Plaintiffs contend that (Cont d ) 9

10 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 10 of 13 Moreover, even were a party to challenge the agency s decision on the grounds that it lacks the authority to act absent a quorum of commissioners, and the Court so concludes, this proceeding should still be limited to the record before the agency. Even under such circumstances, this Court would still lack authority under the APA and controlling precedent to supplement the record unless it can be demonstrated that one of the exceptions discussed above applies. It further seems unclear whether there are circumstances under which the Court can employ evidentiary procedures that may be unavailable to the EAC itself. II. AT MINIMUM, THE COURT SHOULD POSTPONE THE FEBRUARY HEARING TO ALLOW MORE TIME FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER THE PARTIES BRIEFS AND, IF NECESSARY, TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY AND PREPARE FOR ANY REQUIRED EVIDENTIARY HEARING. Consistent with the above-stated principles, the scheduled hearing should focus solely on the parties legal arguments and the administrative record and not on any additional evidence in support of the parties positions. ECF No. 130 at 2. If, after considering the parties arguments and reviewing the agency record, the Court determines that the record is deficient, Defendants request that the Court order the EAC to supplement the record and identify how, in particular, the record needs to be supplemented. Absent the cancellation, or at least postponement, of the evidentiary hearing, Defendants will be severely prejudiced in their ability to prepare. This is especially true given that Plaintiffs have until January 31 to file their notice seeking review of the EAC decision. 6 That timetable the EAC has a nondiscretionary duty to grant the requests, and that its failure to do so is contrary to law and remediable by the Court under the APA. Thus, even under Plaintiffs theory of the case, there would be no need for the Court to conduct an evidentiary hearing or to supplement the EAC s extensive agency record, because the relevant question is essentially one of law, not of fact. 6 As explained above, Defendants do not believe it is appropriate for the Court to consider any extra-record evidence. However, if the Court nevertheless intends to permit Plaintiffs to offer live witness testimony or documentary evidence at the February hearing, Defendants request that the Court order Plaintiffs to disclose (Cont d ) 10

11 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 11 of 13 gives the Defendants virtually no time to prepare an adequate response. The resulting prejudice will be especially acute should the Court consider that proceeding to be the parties sole opportunity to adduce reliable evidence prior to the Court issuing a final adjudication on the merits. 7 Finally, if the Court proceeds with an evidentiary hearing, Defendants ask the Court to hold a telephone status conference to inform the parties how it expects to conduct it i.e., limits on the number of witnesses, documentary proof and the like. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendants request the Court to limit its review to the administrative record, cancel the evidentiary hearing, and entertain oral argument only during a one-day hearing on February 11. Respectfully submitted this 27th day of January, 2014, BARRY R. GRISSOM United States Attorney District of Kansas JON FLEENOR Assistant United States Attorney 500 State Avenue, Suite 360 Kansas City, Kansas Telephone: (913) Fax: (913) Jon.Fleenor@usdoj.gov JOCELYN SAMUELS Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division STUART F. DELERY Assistant Attorney General Civil Division the identity and full contact information for all such witnesses along with a summary of their proposed testimony (and identify any such documents) simultaneously with filing their notice seeking review of the EAC s decision, or no later than Friday, January 31, Defendants would also preserve their right to take discovery of Plaintiffs. 7 To the extent that the Court continues to be concerned about Plaintiffs purported need to have a decision by the end of February, see Hearing Tr. 12/13/2013 at 48:19-22, Defendants assert that Plaintiffs put themselves in this position by waiting over two months from the time they filed the complaint to the time they filed their preliminary injunction motion. Defendants should not be prejudiced because Plaintiffs apparently felt no urgency in seeking the extraordinary remedy of preliminary injunctive relief. 11

12 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 12 of 13 s/ Bradley E. Heard T. CHRISTIAN HERREN, JR. RICHARD A. DELLHEIM BRADLEY E. HEARD DAVID G. COOPER Attorneys, Voting Section Civil Rights Division U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 7th Floor NWB Washington, D.C Telephone: (202) Fax: (202) s/ Felicia L. Chambers JOHN R. GRIFFITHS FELICIA L. CHAMBERS Attorneys, Federal Programs Branch Civil Division U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Room 5323 Washington, D.C Telephone: (202) Fax: (202)

13 Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 135 Filed 01/27/14 Page 13 of 13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This certifies that on the 27th day of January, 2014, the undersigned filed Defendants Motion to Limit Court s Review to the Agency Record, to Limit the February 11-12, 2014 Hearing to Oral Argument, and for a Status Conference Response and supporting memorandum electronically using the CM/ECF system, which automatically sends notice and a copy of the filing to all counsel of record through the Court s electronic filing system. /s/ Felicia L. Chambers FELICIA L. CHAMBERS U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm Washington, D.C Telephone: (202) Facsimile: (202) Felicia.Chambers@usdoj.gov 13

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 126 Filed 01/02/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 126 Filed 01/02/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:13-cv-04095-EFM-DJW Document 126 Filed 01/02/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KRIS W. KOBACH, KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Case

More information

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 1 Filed 08/21/13 Page 1 of 31 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 1 Filed 08/21/13 Page 1 of 31 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:13-cv-04095-EFM-DJW Document 1 Filed 08/21/13 Page 1 of 31 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KRIS W. KOBACH, KANSAS ) SECRETARY OF STATE; ) ) KEN BENNETT, ARIZONA )

More information

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 152 Filed 08/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 152 Filed 08/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-00236-RJL Document 152 Filed 08/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., v. BRIAN NEWBY, et al., Plaintiffs,

More information

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 114 Filed 09/02/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 114 Filed 09/02/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-00236-RJL Document 114 Filed 09/02/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ALABAMA,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPELAS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPELAS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPELAS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT KRIS W. KOBACH, KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, vs. Case Nos. 14-3062, 14-3072 THE UNITED STATES ELECTION ASSISTANCE

More information

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. KRIS W. KOBACH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. KRIS W. KOBACH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, Appellate Case: 14-3062 Document: 01019274718 Date Filed: 07/07/2014 Page: 1 Nos. 14-3062, 14-3072 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT KRIS W. KOBACH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, in her official capacity as Secretary, United States Department of Health

More information

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 93 Filed 12/02/13 Page 1 of 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 93 Filed 12/02/13 Page 1 of 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:13-cv-04095-EFM-DJW Document 93 Filed 12/02/13 Page 1 of 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KRIS W. KOBACH, Kansas Secretary of State; KEN BENNETT, Arizona Secretary

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Cite as: 583 U. S. (2017) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 17A570 (17 801) IN RE UNITED STATES, ET AL. ON APPLICATION FOR STAY AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS [December 8, 2017] The application

More information

Case 1:16-cv JDB Document 56 Filed 01/16/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv JDB Document 56 Filed 01/16/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-02113-JDB Document 56 Filed 01/16/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AARP, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Case No.

More information

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 28 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 28 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case 1:16-cv-00236-RJL Document 28 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., v. BRIAN NEWBY, et al., Plaintiffs,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION Case 4:14-cv-00139-HLM Document 34 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., and DAVID JAMES, Plaintiffs,

More information

Case 4:12-cv Document 105 Filed in TXSD on 11/07/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Case 4:12-cv Document 105 Filed in TXSD on 11/07/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Case 4:12-cv-03009 Document 105 Filed in TXSD on 11/07/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ) EAST TEXAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY, ) et al., ) Plaintiffs, )

More information

Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 190 Filed 04/21/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 190 Filed 04/21/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:13-cv-04095-EFM-TJJ Document 190 Filed 04/21/14 Page 1 of 7 KRIS W. KOBACH, KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE, et al., v. Plaintiffs, THE UNITED STATES ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION, et al., and Defendants,

More information

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 120 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 120 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-00236-RJL Document 120 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ALABAMA,

More information

Case 1:16-cv KBJ Document 15 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv KBJ Document 15 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-01827-KBJ Document 15 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JASON LEOPOLD and RYAN NOAH SHAPIRO, Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 16-cv-1827 (KBJ

More information

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 146 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 146 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-00236-RJL Document 146 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ALABAMA,

More information

Case: 3:17-cv GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 7 - Page ID#: 210

Case: 3:17-cv GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 7 - Page ID#: 210 Case: 3:17-cv-00094-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 7 - Page ID#: 210 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION - FRANKFORT JUDICIAL WATCH,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Norfolk Division. Plaintiff, Defendants. MEMORANDUM FINAL ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Norfolk Division. Plaintiff, Defendants. MEMORANDUM FINAL ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division FILED AUG 2 2 2012 PROJECT VOTE/VOTING FOR AMERICA, INC., CLERK. U.S. DISTRICT COURT NORFOLK. VA Plaintiff, v. CIVIL No. 2:10cv75

More information

Case: 2:16-cv GCS-EPD Doc #: 84 Filed: 10/17/16 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 23383

Case: 2:16-cv GCS-EPD Doc #: 84 Filed: 10/17/16 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 23383 Case: 2:16-cv-00303-GCS-EPD Doc #: 84 Filed: 10/17/16 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 23383 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION OHIO A. PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE, NORTHEAST

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Case 1:16-cv-00236-TDS-JEP Document 207 Filed 07/21/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA JOAQUÍN CARCAÑO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 1:16-cv-00236-TDS-JEP

More information

Case 1:12-cv CKK-BMK-JDB Document 176 Filed 08/16/12 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:12-cv CKK-BMK-JDB Document 176 Filed 08/16/12 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 176 Filed 08/16/12 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS TONI R. DONAHUE, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 18-2012-CM KANSAS BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., Defendants. ORDER In this action brought under the Individuals

More information

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 102 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:16-cv RJL Document 102 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:16-cv-00236-RJL Document 102 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ALABAMA,

More information

Case 3:17-cv VC Document 48 Filed 09/29/17 Page 1 of 17

Case 3:17-cv VC Document 48 Filed 09/29/17 Page 1 of 17 Case :-cv-00-vc Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Mark McKane, P.C. (SBN 0 Austin L. Klar (SBN California Street San Francisco, CA 0 Telephone: ( -00 Fax: ( -00 E-mail: mark.mckane@kirkland.com austin.klar@kirkland.com

More information

Case 1:11-cv RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Case 1:11-cv RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO Case 1:11-cv-00946-RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,

More information

Case 2:13-cv Document 995 Filed in TXSD on 02/22/17 Page 1 of 6

Case 2:13-cv Document 995 Filed in TXSD on 02/22/17 Page 1 of 6 Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 995 Filed in TXSD on 02/22/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, VS. CIVIL

More information

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 85 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 85 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:17-cv-04540-WB Document 85 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Plaintiff, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv DLG.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv DLG. Case: 14-11084 Date Filed: 12/19/2014 Page: 1 of 16 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 14-11084 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-22737-DLG AARON CAMACHO

More information

Case 2:13-cv Document 1052 Filed in TXSD on 07/05/17 Page 1 of 14

Case 2:13-cv Document 1052 Filed in TXSD on 07/05/17 Page 1 of 14 Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 1052 Filed in TXSD on 07/05/17 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v.

More information

Case 2:17-cv MJP Document 217 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. Defendants.

Case 2:17-cv MJP Document 217 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. Defendants. Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of The Honorable Marsha J. Pechman UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 RYAN KARNOSKI, et al., v. Plaintiffs, No. :-cv--mjp DEFENDANTS

More information

Case 1:10-cv JDB Document 3 Filed 04/21/10 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:10-cv JDB Document 3 Filed 04/21/10 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:10-cv-00561-JDB Document 3 Filed 04/21/10 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STEPHEN LAROQUE, ANTHONY CUOMO, JOHN NIX, KLAY NORTHRUP, LEE RAYNOR, and KINSTON

More information

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 02/10/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 02/10/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Appellate Case: 15-8126 Document: 01019569175 Date Filed: 02/10/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF WYOMING, et al; Petitioners - Appellees, and STATE OR NORTH DAKOTA,

More information

Case 3:17-cv WHO Document 108 Filed 05/22/17 Page 1 of 8

Case 3:17-cv WHO Document 108 Filed 05/22/17 Page 1 of 8 Case :-cv-00-who Document 0 Filed 0// Page of 0 0 CHAD A. READLER Acting Assistant Attorney General BRIAN STRETCH United States Attorney JOHN R. TYLER Assistant Director STEPHEN J. BUCKINGHAM (Md. Bar)

More information

Case 1:18-cv LY Document 32-2 Filed 06/25/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv LY Document 32-2 Filed 06/25/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION Case 1:18-cv-00295-LY Document 32-2 Filed 06/25/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION COMMUNITY FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, LTD., and CONSUMER

More information

No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. HO-CHUNK, INC. et al., Appellant,

No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. HO-CHUNK, INC. et al., Appellant, USCA Case #17-5140 Document #1711535 Filed: 01/04/2018 Page 1 of 17 No. 17-5140 IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit HO-CHUNK, INC. et al., Appellant, v. JEFF SESSIONS

More information

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 09/30/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 09/30/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 2:15-cv-09300 Document 1 Filed 09/30/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ALDER CROMWELL, and ) CODY KEENER, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Case No. v. ) ) KRIS KOBACH,

More information

Case 2:15-cv JCC Document 28 Filed 04/06/18 Page 1 of 9

Case 2:15-cv JCC Document 28 Filed 04/06/18 Page 1 of 9 Case :-cv-0-jcc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE PUGET SOUNDKEEPER ALLIANCE and SIERRA CLUB v. Plaintiffs, SCOTT PRUITT, in

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Case 1:16-cv-01274-LCB-JLW Document 33 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA NAACP, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action

More information

Case 2:16-cv CW Document 85 Filed 02/17/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv CW Document 85 Filed 02/17/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION Case 2:16-cv-00579-CW Document 85 Filed 02/17/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION UTE INDIAN TRIBE OF THE UINTAH AND OURAY RESERVATION, et al.,

More information

Case: 3:17-cv GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32-1 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 14 - Page ID#: 217

Case: 3:17-cv GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32-1 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 14 - Page ID#: 217 Case: 3:17-cv-00094-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32-1 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 14 - Page ID#: 217 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION - FRANKFORT JUDICIAL WATCH,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING WADE E. JENSEN and DONALD D. GOFF, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, Case No. 06 - CV - 273 J vs.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ) ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM ) NOW et al., ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 08-CV-4084-NKL

More information

Case 3:12-cv Document 99 Filed in TXSD on 04/07/14 Page 1 of 9

Case 3:12-cv Document 99 Filed in TXSD on 04/07/14 Page 1 of 9 Case 3:12-cv-00044 Document 99 Filed in TXSD on 04/07/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION VOTING FOR AMERICA, PROJECT VOTE, INC., BRAD

More information

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 43 Filed: 12/22/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:435 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 43 Filed: 12/22/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:435 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Case: 1:12-cv-06756 Document #: 43 Filed: 12/22/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:435 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS CHRISTOPHER YEP, MARY ANNE YEP, AND TRIUNE HEALTH GROUP,

More information

Case 2:17-cv JLR Document 179 Filed 04/07/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON.

Case 2:17-cv JLR Document 179 Filed 04/07/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON. Case :-cv-00-jlr Document Filed 0/0/ Page of The Honorable James L. Robart UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., v. Plaintiffs, DONALD TRUMP, in his

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case: 18-15068, 04/10/2018, ID: 10831190, DktEntry: 137-2, Page 1 of 15 Nos. 18-15068, 18-15069, 18-15070, 18-15071, 18-15072, 18-15128, 18-15133, 18-15134 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

More information

Case 1:18-cv ABJ Document 18 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Case 1:18-cv ABJ Document 18 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Case 1:18-cv-00011-ABJ Document 18 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAUL J. MANAFORT, JR., Plaintiff, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ROD J. ROSENSTEIN,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA BLUE RHINO GLOBAL SOURCING, INC. Plaintiff, v. 1:17CV69 BEST CHOICE PRODUCTS a/k/a SKY BILLIARDS, INC., Defendant. ORDER Plaintiff,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA Rel: January 11, 2019 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. MEMORANDUM OPINION (June 14, 2016)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. MEMORANDUM OPINION (June 14, 2016) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and GINA McCARTHY, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection

More information

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT USCA Case #17-1038 Document #1666639 Filed: 03/17/2017 Page 1 of 15 ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) CONSUMERS FOR AUTO RELIABILITY

More information

Case 1:13-cv MMS Document 54 Filed 06/18/15 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

Case 1:13-cv MMS Document 54 Filed 06/18/15 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS Case 1:13-cv-00466-MMS Document 54 Filed 06/18/15 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS JOSEPH CACCIAPALLE, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Case No. 13-cv-00466-MMS

More information

Case 2:15-cv TLN-KJN Document 31-1 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 9

Case 2:15-cv TLN-KJN Document 31-1 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 9 Case :-cv-0-tln-kjn Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 Linda S. Mitlyng, Esquire CA Bar No. 0 P.O. Box Eureka, California 0 0-0 mitlyng@sbcglobal.net Attorney for defendants Richard Baland & Robert Davis

More information

Case 1:13-cv RMC Document 29 Filed 07/30/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:13-cv RMC Document 29 Filed 07/30/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:13-cv-00365-RMC Document 29 Filed 07/30/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WILLIAM C. TUTTLE ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No. v. ) 1:13-cv-00365-RMC

More information

Case 1:17-cv JAL Document 73 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2017 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:17-cv JAL Document 73 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2017 Page 1 of 11 Case 1:17-cv-20301-JAL Document 73 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 17-cv-20301-LENARD/GOODMAN UNITED STATES

More information

Case 2:13-cv Document Filed in TXSD on 06/04/14 Page 1 of 18 EXHIBIT 5

Case 2:13-cv Document Filed in TXSD on 06/04/14 Page 1 of 18 EXHIBIT 5 Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 315-6 Filed in TXSD on 06/04/14 Page 1 of 18 EXHIBIT 5 Case 1:12-cv-00128-RMC-DST-RLW 2:13-cv-00193 Document 315-6 Document Filed in 154 TXSD Filed on 06/04/14 05/28/12 Page

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FLORIDA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP), as an organization and representative of its

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Defendants/Appellants.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Defendants/Appellants. Appellate Case: 11-2063 Document: 01018812445 Date Filed: 03/19/2012 Page: 1 CELIA VALDEZ, et al., UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Case No. 11-2063 DIANNA

More information

Case 2:16-cv JAR-JPO Document 246 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6

Case 2:16-cv JAR-JPO Document 246 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 Case 2:16-cv-02105-JAR-JPO Document 246 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS STEVEN WAYNE FISH, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:11-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 12/20/11 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and ) ) COALITION FOR

More information

Case 3:10-cv RRB Document 80 Filed 12/27/10 Page 1 of 6

Case 3:10-cv RRB Document 80 Filed 12/27/10 Page 1 of 6 Case 3:-cv-00-RRB Document 0 Filed 1// Page 1 of 3 4 Thomas V. Van Flein John Tiemessen Clapp, Peterson, Van Flein, Tiemessen & Thorsness LLC 11 H S1., Suite 0 Anchorage, Alaska 01-344 Phone: (0 - Facsimile:

More information

RECENT CASES. (codified at 42 U.S.C. 7661a 7661f). 1 See Eric Biber, Two Sides of the Same Coin: Judicial Review of Administrative Agency Action

RECENT CASES. (codified at 42 U.S.C. 7661a 7661f). 1 See Eric Biber, Two Sides of the Same Coin: Judicial Review of Administrative Agency Action 982 RECENT CASES FEDERAL STATUTES CLEAN AIR ACT D.C. CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT EPA CANNOT PREVENT STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES FROM SUPPLEMENTING INADEQUATE EMISSIONS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS IN THE ABSENCE OF

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Prescott Division

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Prescott Division Case :0-cv-00-PGR Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 DENNIS K. BURKE United States Attorney District of Arizona SUE A. KLEIN Assistant U.S. Attorney Arizona State Bar No. Two Renaissance Square 0 North Central

More information

) In re: ) Case No (SMB) ) Chapter 11 QUIGLEY COMPANY, INC. ) ) Dist. Ct. Civil Action No. ) 1:06-cv (KMW) Debtor.

) In re: ) Case No (SMB) ) Chapter 11 QUIGLEY COMPANY, INC. ) ) Dist. Ct. Civil Action No. ) 1:06-cv (KMW) Debtor. Mark D. Plevin (MP-5788) Leslie A. Epley (LE-5825) Kelly R. Cusick (KC-7965) CROWELL & MORING LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 624-2500 Paul G. Burns (PB-0269) LEVIN & GLASSER,

More information

Case 1:07-cv RGS Document 24 Filed 03/28/07 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:07-cv RGS Document 24 Filed 03/28/07 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Case 1:07-cv-10471-RGS Document 24 Filed 03/28/07 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) NOLBERTA AGUILAR, et al., ) ) Petitioners and Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES

More information

Case 2:10-cv RLH -PAL Document 29 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:10-cv RLH -PAL Document 29 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8 Case :0-cv-0-RLH -PAL Document Filed /0/0 Page of 0 SHAWN A. MANGANO, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 shawn@manganolaw.com SHAWN A. MANGANO, LTD. 0 West Cheyenne Avenue, Suite 0 Las Vegas, Nevada -0 (0) - telephone

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, 0 BENJAMIN C. MIZER Acting Assistant Attorney General JOSEPH H. HARRINGTON Assistant United States Attorney, E.D.WA JOHN R. TYLER Assistant Director KENNETH E. SEALLS Trial Attorney U.S. Department of

More information

Case 1:16-cv TSC Document 9 Filed 09/20/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:16-cv TSC Document 9 Filed 09/20/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case 1:16-cv-01641-TSC Document 9 Filed 09/20/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEYOND NUCLEAR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, et al., Defendants

More information

Case 4:92-cv SOH Document 72 Filed 01/17/19 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 730

Case 4:92-cv SOH Document 72 Filed 01/17/19 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 730 Case 4:92-cv-04040-SOH Document 72 Filed 01/17/19 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 730 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION MARY TURNER, et al. PLAINTIFFS V. CASE NO.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Hunter v. Salem, Missouri, City of et al Doc. 59 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ANAKA HUNTER, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SALEM PUBLIC LIBRARY, et

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al. Appellate Case: 16-4154 Document: 01019730944 Date Filed: 12/05/2016 Page: 1 No. 16-4154 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation,

More information

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Case: 17-3752 Document: 003113097118 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/28/2018 No. 17-3752 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DONALD J.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendant/s.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendant/s. Case :-cv-0-jak -JEM Document #:0 Filed 0// Page of Page ID UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JONATHAN BIRDT, Plaintiff/s, v. CHARLIE BECK, et al., Defendant/s. Case No. LA CV-0

More information

Case 1:15-cv MJW Document 89 Filed 04/11/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:15-cv MJW Document 89 Filed 04/11/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Case 1:15-cv-01523-MJW Document 89 Filed 04/11/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 Civil Action No. 15-cv-01523-MJW ROBERT W. SANCHEZ, Plaintiff, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA CASTLE MOUNTAIN COALITION, et al., v. Plaintiffs, OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-00043-SLG

More information

Case 3:14-cv WWE Document 28 Filed 07/16/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

Case 3:14-cv WWE Document 28 Filed 07/16/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT Case 3:14-cv-00260-WWE Document 28 Filed 07/16/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT CONLEY MONK, KEVIN MARRET, ) GEORGE SIDERS, JAMES COTTAM, ) JAMES DAVIS, VIETNAM

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., and DAVID JAMES, Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. v. 4:14-CV-139-HLM U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

More information

Plaintiff s Memorandum of Law in Reply to the. Defendants Response to the. Plaintiff s Motion to Reconsider Order of Abstention

Plaintiff s Memorandum of Law in Reply to the. Defendants Response to the. Plaintiff s Motion to Reconsider Order of Abstention Case 3:11-cv-00005-JPB Document 44 Filed 10/20/11 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 312 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT MARTINSBURG West Virginia Citizens Defense

More information

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 34 Filed 11/13/13 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:13-cv EFM-DJW Document 34 Filed 11/13/13 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:13-cv-04095-EFM-DJW Document 34 Filed 11/13/13 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KRIS W. KOBACH, KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE, KEN BENNETT, ARIZONA SECRETARY

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DIVISION Case :-cv-00-jgb-sp Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 ROBERT G. DREHER Acting Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division United States Department of Justice F. PATRICK

More information

[NOT YET SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

[NOT YET SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT USCA Case #14-5254 Document #1568874 Filed: 08/20/2015 Page 1 of 16 [NOT YET SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT FAIRHOLME FUNDS, INC.,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Case 1:16-cv-00452-TCB Document 29 Filed 08/11/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION COMMON CAUSE, et al., * * Civil Action No. Plaintiffs,

More information

Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 158 Filed 03/27/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:13-cv EFM-TJJ Document 158 Filed 03/27/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:13-cv-04095-EFM-TJJ Document 158 Filed 03/27/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS KRIS W. KOBACH, KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE, et al., v. Plaintiffs, THE UNITED

More information

Case 2:10-cv ES-JAD Document 468 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:10-cv ES-JAD Document 468 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 210-cv-03345-ES-JAD Document 468 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID 11036 Not for Publication UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY MATTIE HALLEY, SHEM ONDITI, LETICIA MALAVÉ, and SERGIO

More information

Case 2:16-cv TLN-AC Document 28 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:16-cv TLN-AC Document 28 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-0-tln-ac Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 CAL-PAC RANCHO CORDOVA, LLC, dba PARKWEST CORDOVA CASINO; CAPITOL CASINO, INC.; LODI CARDROOM,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA Diskriter, Inc. v. Alecto Healthcare Services Ohio Valley LLC et al Doc. 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA DISKRITER, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, Plaintiff,

More information

Case 5:17-cv EFM-TJJ Document 20 Filed 06/16/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 5:17-cv EFM-TJJ Document 20 Filed 06/16/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 5:17-cv-03063-EFM-TJJ Document 20 Filed 06/16/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS BOBBI DARNELL, ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 17-cv-3063-EFM-TJJ ) JOHN MERCHANT,

More information

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit United States v. Kevin Brewer Doc. 802508136 United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 13-1261 United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kevin Lamont Brewer

More information

Case 4:16-cv ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779

Case 4:16-cv ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779 Case 4:16-cv-00732-ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION PLANO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, et al., Plaintiffs,

More information

Case 1:17-cv MJG Document 146 Filed 04/25/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Case 1:17-cv MJG Document 146 Filed 04/25/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Case 1:17-cv-02459-MJG Document 146 Filed 04/25/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BROCK STONE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case 1:17-cv-02459-MJG DONALD J. TRUMP,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION MISSOURI COALITION FOR THE ) ENVIRONMENT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case Number: 03-4217-CV-C-NKL ) MICHAEL O. LEAVITT, Administrator

More information

Case 1:12-cv WJZ Document 68 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2012 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:12-cv WJZ Document 68 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2012 Page 1 of 7 Case 1:12-cv-22282-WJZ Document 68 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2012 Page 1 of 7 KARLA VANESSA ARCIA, et al., v. Plaintiffs, KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State, Defendant.

More information

Case 1:18-cv TCW Document 218 Filed 05/18/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS BID PROTEST

Case 1:18-cv TCW Document 218 Filed 05/18/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS BID PROTEST Case 1:18-cv-00204-TCW Document 218 Filed 05/18/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS BID PROTEST FMS Investment Corp. et al., Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant, and PERFORMANT

More information

Case 3:14-cv REP-AWA-BMK Document 146 Filed 04/17/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID# 5723

Case 3:14-cv REP-AWA-BMK Document 146 Filed 04/17/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID# 5723 Case 3:14-cv-00852-REP-AWA-BMK Document 146 Filed 04/17/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID# 5723 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION Golden Bethune-Hill, et al., Plaintiffs,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT AND PORT JEFFERSON STEAMBOAT COMPANY, ET AL., Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 3:03 CV 599 (CFD) - against - BRIDGEPORT PORT AUTHORITY, July 13, 2010

More information

Case 3:10-cv BR Document 123 Filed 11/15/13 Page 1 of 12 Page ID#: 2969

Case 3:10-cv BR Document 123 Filed 11/15/13 Page 1 of 12 Page ID#: 2969 Case 3:10-cv-00750-BR Document 123 Filed 11/15/13 Page 1 of 12 Page ID#: 2969 STUART F. DELERY Assistant Attorney General DIANE KELLEHER Assistant Branch Director AMY POWELL amy.powell@usdoj.gov LILY FAREL

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) COMMISSION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) 1:13CV46 ) WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & ) RICE, LLP, ) ) Defendant.

More information

Case 1:17-cv CKK Document 19 Filed 07/18/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. ORDER (July 18, 2017)

Case 1:17-cv CKK Document 19 Filed 07/18/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. ORDER (July 18, 2017) Case 1:17-cv-01351-CKK Document 19 Filed 07/18/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, et al., v. Plaintiffs, DONALD TRUMP, et al., Defendants.

More information