Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
12-2335 #94

12-2335 #94

Ratings: (0)|Views: 128 |Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Doc #94 - BLAG Motion to Dismiss the DOJ appeal
Doc #94 - BLAG Motion to Dismiss the DOJ appeal

More info:

Published by: Equality Case Files on Jul 23, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/08/2014

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007 Telephone: 212-857-8500
MOTION INFORMATION STATEMENTDocket Number(s)
: Caption [use short title]
Motion for:
Set forth below precise, complete statement of relief sought: 
MOVING PARTY: OPPOSING PARTY:
9
Plaintiff 
9
Defendant
9
Appellant/Petitioner 
9
Appellee/Respondent
MOVING ATTORNEY: OPPOSING ATTORNEY
:[name of attorney, with firm, address, phone number and e-mail] Court-Judge/Agency appealed from:
Please check appropriate boxes:FOR EMERGENCY MOTIONS, MOTIONS FOR STAYS ANDINJUNCTIONS PENDING APPEAL:
Has movant notified opposing counsel (required by Local Rule 27.1):Has request for relief been made below?
9
Yes
9
 No
9
Yes
9
 No (explain): Has this relief been previously sought in this Court?
9
Yes
9
 NoRequested return date and explanation of emergency:Opposing counsel’s position on motion:
9
Unopposed
9
Opposed
9
Don’t KnowDoes opposing counsel intend to file a response:
9
Yes
9
No
9
Don’t KnowIs oral argument on motion requested?
9
Yes
9
 No (requests for oral argument will not necessarily be granted)Has argument
 
date of appeal been set?
9
Yes
9
 No If yes, enter date:__________________________________________________________ 
Signature of Moving Attorney:
 ___________________________________ 
Date:
___________________Service by:
9
CM/ECF
9
Other [Attach proof of service]
 
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT
the motion is
GRANTED DENIED
.
FOR THE COURT:
CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLFE, Clerk of CourtDate: _____________________________________________By: _______________________________________________
Form T-1080
(rev. 7-12)
12-2435To Dismiss Appeal No. 12-2435
The House seeks an order dismissing appeal No. 12-2435, filed by the Department of Justice on behalf
of defendant United States. The United States prevailed below and as an unaggrieved party,
Windsor v. United States
lacks standing to prosecute its appeal.
The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives
United State of America
 
Paul D. ClementBancroft PLLC1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 470Washington, D.C. 20036202-234-0090 pclement@bancroftpllc.comAugust E. FlentjeU.S. Department of JusticeWashington, D.C. 20530950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Room 3613202-514-1278 august.flentje@usdoj.govHon. Barbara S. Jones/ S.D.N.Y.
Currently set for week of September 24, 2012, but scheduling requests are outstanding
07/19/2012
Case: 12-2335 Document: 94-1 Page: 1 07/19/2012 668933 1
/s/ Paul D. Clement
 
 
Nos. 12-2335 & 12-2435
____________________UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
____________________
 
EDITH SCHLAIN WINDSOR,
Plaintiff-Appellee
,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
 Defendant 
,BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUPOF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
 Intervenor-Defendant-Appellant 
.EDITH SCHLAIN WINDSOR,
Plaintiff-Appellee
,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
 Defendant-Appellant,
 BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUPOF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
 Intervenor-Defendant 
.____________________
MOTION OF THE BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUP OFTHE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESTO DISMISS APPEAL NO. 12-2435
Case: 12-2335 Document: 94-2 Page: 1 07/19/2012 668933 27
 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF AUTHORITIES
............................................................... ii
 INTRODUCTION
................................................................................. 1
BACKGROUND
................................................................................... 1DOJ Carries Out Its Constitutional Responsibility ...................... 2DOJ Abandons Its Constitutional Responsibility ......................... 4This Case Works Its Way Through the District Court andto This Court ................................................................................. 6
ARGUMENT
......................................................................................... 9I.
 
DOJ Prevailed Below and, Therefore, Lacks Standingto Appeal .................................................................................. 9II.
 
DOJ’s Appeal Is Superfluous and Cannot Be Supportedby Interests DOJ Has Disowned and Is Working toFrustrate ................................................................................... 13
CONCLUSION
 ...................................................................................... 18
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 
Case: 12-2335 Document: 94-2 Page: 2 07/19/2012 668933 27

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Marty Lederman liked this
Marty Lederman liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->