IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 9, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 2, No (and consolidated cases) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED 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

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

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED: OCTOBER 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR MAY 8, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 19, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

No (and consolidated cases) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APP: AJllS--~---- PETITION FOR REVIEW. and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15( a), the Mozilla Corporation

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD ON APRIL 15, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Defendants-Appellees.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ReCEIVED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU CLERK

Nos & IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. COOPER TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent, v.

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

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 19, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 27, No and Consolidated Cases

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. SIERRA CLUB; and VIRGINIA WILDERNESS COMMITTEE,

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED 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

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION OF AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO TRANSFER AND HOLD CASES IN ABEYANCE

BEFORE THE UNITED STATATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, CHARLES D.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT. ULTRAMERCIAL, LLC and ULTRAMERCIAL, INC., and WILDTANGENT, INC.

In The United States Court of Appeals For the Third Circuit

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. DAVID JACOBS; GARY HINDES, Appellants,

CLERK RECEIVED. JTW OR UiSThICT ØF OL tikbta. FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRC1 lit ETSY, INC., Petitioner

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

In the Supreme Court of the United States

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

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. EDWARD TUFFLY, AKA Bud Tuffly, Plaintiff-Appellant,

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 34 Filed 10/26/18 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 15 Filed 10/26/18 Page 1 of 8

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

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT. JEFFREY F. SAYERS Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2011 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT LEON H. RIDEOUT; ANDREW LANGOIS; BRANDON D. ROSS. Plaintiff - Appellees

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit

Nos (L), IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. PPL ENERGYPLUS, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.

Case 2:16-cv NDF Document 29 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 9

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

Telecom Update 2016 Outlook 2017

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT CASE NO MANUEL LEONIDAS DURAN ORTEGA, Petitioner,

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case No , & (consolidated) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Case: Document: 16 Filed: 12/02/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Filed: December 02, 2016

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

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

UNOPOSSED PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT S AMENDED MOTION FOR COURT S APPROVAL TO ELECTRONIC FILE CASE DOCUMENTS VIA CM/ECF SYSTEM 1

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

PETITIONERS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF JOINT MOTION TO TRANSFER

Case: Document: Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Filed: September 04, 2012

Case: Document: 20 Filed: 01/26/2017 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Filed: January 26, 2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Appellants-Plaintiffs, V. CASE NO Appellee-Defendant, Appellee-Intervenor-Defendant.

Case Nos , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT ARIOSA DIAGNOSTICS, INC., ILLUMINA, INC.,

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL Environmental Law Program

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JEFFREY ALEXANDER STERLING, and JAMES RISEN,

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2014 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SHUTDOWN, FUNDED AGENCIES CAN STILL LITIGATE

REPLY COMMENTS OF THE COMPUTER & COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION (CCIA)

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. No (and consolidated cases)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Transcription:

USCA Case #18-1051 Document #1768455 Filed: 01/15/2019 Page 1 of 5 ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 1, 2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Mozilla Corporation, et al., ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) No. 18-1051 (and ) consolidated cases) ) and United States of America, ) Respondents. ) MOTION TO POSTPONE ORAL ARGUMENT IN LIGHT OF LAPSE IN APPROPRIATIONS The respectfully moves to postpone oral argument in the above-captioned case, which is currently scheduled for February 1, 2019. We have notified the other parties of this motion. Petitioners oppose the motion. Petitioner-intervenors Internet Association, Entertainment Software Association, CCIA, and Writers Guild of America, West, Inc. take no position on the motion. The United States, intervenor Digital Justice Foundation, and respondent-intervenors USTelecom, CTIA, NCTA, American Cable Association, and Wireless Internet Service Providers Association do not oppose the motion. The Commission recognizes that the Court has indicated that arguments in February will proceed as scheduled. However, due to the recent lapse in funding for the FCC and the relevant component of the Department of Justice, the

USCA Case #18-1051 Document #1768455 Filed: 01/15/2019 Page 2 of 5 2 Commission believes that, in an abundance of caution, it should move for an extension to ensure that attorneys may fully prepare for argument consistent with the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1342, as interpreted in guidance from the United States Department of Justice and this Court s recent order in Kornitzky Group, LLC v. Elwell, No. 18-1160 (D.C. Cir. issued Jan. 9, 2019). In its guidance, the Department of Justice instructs government attorneys to request that active [civil] cases be postponed until funding is available. Kornitzky Group, opinion of Judges Srinivasan and Edwards, concurring in the denial of the motion, at 1 (citing U.S. Dep t of Justice, FY 2019 Contingency Plan at 3 (Sept. 11, 2018)). As members of this Court noted, however, [i]f a court denies the request [for postponement] and adheres to its existing schedule, the Government will comply with the court s order, which would constitute express legal authorization for the activity to continue under the Antideficiency Act. Id. (quoting U.S. Dep t of Justice, FY 2019 Contingency Plan at 3).

USCA Case #18-1051 Document #1768455 Filed: 01/15/2019 Page 3 of 5 3 The Commission respectfully requests prompt resolution of its motion so that it may fully prepare for argument in the event that the Court intends to hear the argument as scheduled on February 1, 2019. Respectfully submitted, Thomas M. Johnson, Jr. General Counsel January 15, 2019 /s/scott M. Noveck James M. Carr Scott M. Noveck Counsel Washington, D.C. 20554 (202) 418-1740

USCA Case #18-1051 Document #1768455 Filed: 01/15/2019 Page 4 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPE-VOLUME LIMIT Certificate of Compliance With Type-Volume Limitation, Typeface Requirements and Type Style Requirements 1. This document complies with the word limit of Fed. R. App. P. 27(d)(2) because, excluding the parts of the document exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(f) and D.C. Circuit Rule 32(e)(1): this document contains 323 words, or this document uses a monospaced typeface and contains lines of text. 2. This document complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5) and the type style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6) because: this document has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word 2016 in 14-point Times New Roman, or this document has been prepared in a monospaced spaced typeface using with. /s/ Scott M. Noveck Scott M. Noveck. Counsel for Respondent

USCA Case #18-1051 Document #1768455 Filed: 01/15/2019 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE I, Scott M. Noveck, hereby certify that on January 15, 2019, I filed the foregoing Motion to Postpone Oral Argument in Light of Lapse in Appropriations with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit using the electronic CM/ECF system. Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the CM/ECF system. /s/ Scott M. Noveck Scott M. Noveck Counsel Washington, D.C. 20554 (202) 418-1740