CDC

Here are cases on the CDC eviction moratorium, and the CDC cruise ship restrictions, starting with a summary of the eviction moratorium litigation — I’ll try to keep it updated as necessary.

Several cases, brought by landlords and realtors, have attempted to invalidate the CDC eviction moratorium.  Alphabetically by jurisdiction, they are

Alabama Ass’n of Realtors v. U.S. D.H.H.S., No. 1:20-cv-3377 (D. D.C.), No. 21-5093 (D.C. Cir.), No. 20A169 (U.S. Supreme Court) (district court ruling against moratorium, but stayed; D.C. Circuit ruling for moratorium in affirming stay; Supreme Court ruling affirming stay, 5-4, with Kavanaugh concurrence about limited duration of moratorium and stay; landlords return to court after new partial moratorium issued)

Brown v. Azar, No. 1:20-cv-3702 (N.D. Ga.), No. 20-14210 (11th Cir.) (district court denying injunction against moratorium, Eleventh Circuit affirming denial)

Chambless Enterprises v. Redfield, No. 3:20-cv-1455 (W.D. La.), No. 21-30037 (5th Cir.) (district court denying injunction against moratorium, case pending on Fifth Circuit appeal)

Skyworks, Ltd., v. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 5:20-cv-2407 (N.D. Ohio), Nos. 21-3443 and 21-3563 (6th Cir.) (trial level ruling against moratorium, but limited to parties and area; landlords’ appeal and U.S.’s appeal both pending)

Tiger Lily LLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Housing and Urban Development, No. 2:20-cv-2692 (W.D. Tenn.), No. 21-5256 (6th Cir.) (trial level ruling against moratorium, affirmed by Sixth Circuit); and

Terkel v. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 6:20-cv-564 (E.D. Tex.), No. 21-40137 (5th Cir.) (trial level ruling that moratorium beyond federal power; case pending on Fifth Circuit appeal)

There are also a takings case, in the Court of Federal Claims, in which landlords are seeking damages, and a due process case, with a motion pending before the Supreme Court, where landlords are seeking to overturn a New York State eviction moratorium.

National Apt. Ass’n v. U.S., No. 1:21-cv-1621 (Ct. Fed. Cl.) (just filed)

Chrysafis v. Marks, No. 2:21-cv-2516 (E.D. N.Y.), No. 21A8 (U.S. Supreme Court) (trial court denying landlords injunction)

Terkel is the case that holds that an eviction moratorium is beyond the power of the Federal Government, no matter what the text of the CDC’s statute might say.  The other cases interpret the text.  The first case that has gone to the Supreme Court is the Alabama Association of Realtors case: Judge Friedrich held that the moratorium was not authorized by statute, but stayed her ruling; the D.C. Circuit upheld the stay while observing that the CDC was likely to win on the merits; the Supreme Court’s order sustained the stay, with Justice Kavanaugh concurring to say that the U.S. would lose on the merits but the equities supported keeping the moratorium in place until July 31.  After the CDC partially extended the moratorium on August 3, the plaintiffs filed motions in district court, which were heard August 9.

In the Chrysafis case, challenging the New York State eviction moratorium, the Supreme Court asked the New York authorities to respond to the emergency motion by 4 pm EDT Wednesday, August 4, which they did.

The CDC eviction moratorium

42 U.S. Code § 264 – Regulations to control communicable diseases

(a) Promulgation and enforcement by Surgeon General

The Surgeon General, with the approval of the Secretary, is authorized to make and enforce such regulations as in his judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession. For purposes of carrying out and enforcing such regulations, the Surgeon General may provide for such inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, destruction of animals or articles found to be so infected or contaminated as to be sources of dangerous infection to human beings, and other measures, as in his judgment may be necessary.

(b) Apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals

Regulations prescribed under this section shall not provide for the apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals except for the purpose of preventing the introduction, transmission, or spread of such communicable diseases as may be specified from time to time in Executive orders of the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary, in consultation with the Surgeon General,[1].

(c) Application of regulations to persons entering from foreign countries

Except as provided in subsection (d), regulations prescribed under this section, insofar as they provide for the apprehension, detention, examination, or conditional release of individuals, shall be applicable only to individuals coming into a State or possession from a foreign country or a possession.

(d) Apprehension and examination of persons reasonably believed to be infected

(1)

Regulations prescribed under this section may provide for the apprehension and examination of any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage and (A) to be moving or about to move from a State to another State; or (B) to be a probable source of infection to individuals who, while infected with such disease in a qualifying stage, will be moving from a State to another State. Such regulations may provide that if upon examination any such individual is found to be infected, he may be detained for such time and in such manner as may be reasonably necessary. For purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes, in addition to the several States, only the District of Columbia.
(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term “qualifying stage”, with respect to a communicable disease, means that such disease—

(A)

is in a communicable stage; or
(B)

is in a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals.
 
(e) Preemption

Nothing in this section or section 266 of this title, or the regulations promulgated under such sections, may be construed as superseding any provision under State law (including regulations and including provisions established by political subdivisions of States), except to the extent that such a provision conflicts with an exercise of Federal authority under this section or section 266 of this title.

Moratorium, CARES Act, Pub. L. 116-136, sec. 4024:

CARES Act sec. 4024

Temporary halt, 85 Fed. Reg. 55,292 (Sept. 4, 2020)

2020-19654

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260, Div. N., Sec. 502

sec. 502

Temporary halt, 86 Fed.Reg. 8020 (Feb. 3, 2021)

2021-02243

Moratorium extension, 86 Fed. Reg. 16,731 (March 31, 2021) (signed 3/28)

2021-06718

Temporary halt, until July 31, released June 24, 2021

CDC_Eviction_Extension_Order_Final_06242021

Letter to courts and court administrators from Associate Attorney General Gupta, June 24, 2021

Letter from Associate Attorney General Gupta_June 24 2021

New partial moratorium, August 3, 2021

CDC Temporary Halt in Residential Evictions in Communities with Substantial or High Levels of COVID-19 8-3-2021

 

CDC cases: eviction moratorium

 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA/D.C. CIRCUIT

Alabama Ass’n of Realtors v. U.S. D.H.H.S., No. 1:20-cv-3377 (D. D.C., filed Nov. 20, 2020)

Complaint

6846592-0–18708

Motion for expedited summary judgment, Nov. 20, 2020

merged_64663_-1-1628462161

 
12/04/2020   MINUTE ORDER granting the parties’ 15 Joint Motion for Briefing Schedule. Accordingly, the defendants shall provide the administrative record to the plaintiffs and file a certified list of its contents on or before December 11, 2020; the defendants shall file their opposition to the plaintiffs’ expedited summary judgment motion and their cross-motion for summary judgment on or before December 21, 2020; the plaintiffs shall file any reply in support of their motion and their opposition to the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment on or before December 28, 2020; and the defendants shall file any reply in support of their cross-motion on or before January 6, 2021. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants’ obligation to answer shall be deferred to 30 days following resolution of the cross-motions, if the case remains pending. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on December 4, 2020. (lcdlf2) (Entered: 12/04/2020)

US motion for summary judgment/opposition to plaintiffs’ motion, Dec. 21, 2020

merged_37143_-1-1628462691

Plaintiffs’ opposition/reply, Dec. 28, 2020

merged_97566_-1-1628462820

US reply, Jan. 6, 2021

6907142-0–31529

US partial motion to dismiss, Jan. 6, 2021

6959963-0–32474

Joint status report, Feb. 8, 2021

6959963-0–32474

02/10/2021   MINUTE ORDER. Upon consideration of the parties’ 36 Joint Status Report, it is ORDERED that the following schedule shall govern further proceedings: the plaintiffs shall file a response to the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss on or before February 15, 2021; the defendants shall file a reply in support of their partial motion to dismiss on or before February 22, 2021; the defendants shall file an updated certified list of the contents of the administrative record on or before February 22, 2021; and the plaintiffs shall file an appendix pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(n) on or before February 24, 2021. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on February 10, 2021. (lcdlf2) (Entered: 02/10/2021)

Plaintiffs’ opposition to US motion to dismiss, Feb. 15, 2021

merged_9926_-1-1628463350

US reply supporting motion to dismiss, Feb. 22, 2021

6983388-0–37915

04/29/2021   Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Dabney L. Friedrich: Motion Hearing held on 4/29/2021 re 32 Partial MOTION to Dismiss filed by NINA B WITKOFSKY, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, WILLIAM P. BARR, ROBERT R. REDFIELD, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ALEX M. AZAR, II, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by NINA B WITKOFSKY, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, WILLIAM P. BARR, ROBERT R. REDFIELD, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ALEX M. AZAR, II, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. Court Reporter Sara Wick. (zjch) (Entered: 04/29/2021)
MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding the plaintiffs’ 6 Motion for Expedited Summary Judgment and the defendants’ 26 Motion for Summary Judgment and 32 Partial Motion to Dismiss. See text for details. Signed by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on May 5, 2021. (lcdlf1) (Entered: 05/05/2021)

Opinion, May 5, 2021

7114760-0–88370

Order, May 5, 2021

7114736-0–88125

US notice of appeal, May 5, 2021

7115658-0–9533

US motion for emergency stay, May 5, 2021

merged_42994_-1-1620260992

05/05/2021   MINUTE ORDER. Before the Court is the defendants’ 57 Emergency Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal of this Court’s 53 May 5, 2021 Order vacating the national eviction moratorium at 86 Fed. Reg. 16,731. In this emergency motion, the defendants request an immediate administrative stay to give this Court time to consider and rule upon its motion to stay this case pending appeal. Alternatively, the defendants request that the Court stay its 53 May 5, 2021 Order as to all parties except for the plaintiffs. Defs.’ Emergency Mot. for a Stay Pending Appeal at 1 n.1, 8-9, Dkt. 57. Although the plaintiffs have not yet filed an opposition to the defendants’ motion, which was filed at 6:54 p.m. this evening, the defendants represent that the plaintiffs oppose the motion. Id. at 1 n.1. In order to give the Court time to consider the merits of the defendants’ 57 Emergency Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal, and the plaintiffs time to file an opposition to the motion, the Court will grant the defendants’ request for a temporary administrative stay.This Minute Order should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of the defendants’ motion. The Court notes, however, that, as the Court has explained, see Mem. Op. at 19, Dkt. 54, the law in this Circuit is clear: where a court concludes that an agency has exceeded its statutory authority, as this Court has done here, see Mem. Op. at 17, vacatur of the rule is the proper remedy in this Circuit. See Nat’l Mining Ass’n v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 145 F.3d 1399, 1409 (D.C. Cir. 1998). Based on this clear authority, courts in this Circuit do not restrict vacatur only to those plaintiffs before the Court. See, e.g., O.A. v. Trump, 404 F. Supp. 3d 109, 152-53 (D.D.C. 2019). Indeed, the government has been unable to point to a single case in which a court in this Circuit has done so. See Mot. Hr’g Rough Tr. at 31.

 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Court’s 53 May 5, 2021 Order is administratively STAYED. It is further ORDERED that the plaintiffs shall file any opposition to the defendants’ motion on or before May 12, 2021, and the defendants shall file any reply within four days of the date the plaintiffs’ opposition is filed. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on May 5, 2021. (lcdlf1)

(Entered: 05/05/2021)

D.C. Circuit # 21-5093

US emergency motion for stay at D.C. Circuit, May 7, 2021

DCC US emergency mo stay 5 7 21

Plaintiffs’ opposition to US motion for stay, May 7, 2021

merged_53612_-1-1620584589

US’s reply supporting stay, May 11, 2021

7126609-0–32459

Stay opinion and order, May 14, 2021

7133241-0–10043

7133225-0–9774

Plaintiffs’ letter to Judge Friedrich, May 17, 2021

7136444-0–65001

Plaintiffs’ emergency motion, May 17, 2021

DCC pltf emergency mo stay

D.C. Circuit scheduling order, May 18, 2021

DCC briefing order 5 18 21

US’s response to plaintiffs’ May 17 letter, May 19, 2021

7139500-0–75328

US opposition to plaintiffs’ emergency motion, May 24, 2021

DCC US op to lifting stay

Plaintiffs’ reply supporting emergency motion, May 26, 2021

DCC Alabama Assn lift emergency stay reply

American Academy of Pediatrics amicus, June 1, 2021

DCC am acad pediatrics amicus

Order, June 2, 2021

DCC order on stay 6 2 21

Plaintiffs’ emergency application for vacatur of stay, June 3, 2021

20210603170521964_SCOTUS Application to Vacate Stay

Jun 04 2021 Response to application (20A169) requested by The Chief Justice, due Thursday, June 10, 2021, by 5 p.m.

21 states’ amicus response, June 10, 2021

20210610135137833_FINAL COMBINED Mtn CDC Br

US response, June 10, 2021

20210610160741010_20A169 Alabama Realtors

Plaintiffs’ reply, June 14, 2021

20210614135951026_20A169 – Reply ISO Application

Plaintiffs’ letter, June 23, 2021

20210624124944980_20A169 Supreme Court Letter Regarding June 2021 Extension

US letter re CDC one-month moratorium extension, June 24, 2021

20210624160206672_letter 20A169

American Academy of Pediatrics amicus, June 28, 2021

20210628112000610_Alabama Realtors v. HHS 20A169 motion and brief of amici curiae AAP et al

Order, June 29, 2021

20a169_4f15

US notice of partial moratorium, August 3, 2021

AAR US notice partial moratorium 8 3

Plaintiffs’ emergency motion to enforce Supreme Court ruling, August 4, 2021

merged_8905_-1-1628128998

08/05/2021   MINUTE ORDER. It is ORDERED that the defendants shall file any opposition to the plaintiffs’ 67 Emergency Motion before August 6, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. The plaintiffs shall file any reply before August 6, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on August 5, 2021. (lcdlf1) (Entered: 08/05/2021)

US response to emergency motion, August 6, 2021

merged_94505_-1-1628254621

Third Amendment Lawyers’ Association motion for leave to file amicus, and amicus, August 6, 2021

Third Amendment Lawyers Assn mo leave file

Third Amendment Lawyers Assn amicus

Plaintiffs’ reply, August 6, 2021

Ala Assn reply 8 6

08/06/2021

 

MINUTE ORDER scheduling a hearing by videoconference on the plaintiffs’ 67 Emergency Motion on August 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on August 6, 2021. (lcdlf1) (Entered: 08/06/2021)

08/09/2021   Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Dabney L. Friedrich: Motion Hearing held on 8/9/2021 re 67 Emergency MOTION to Enforce the Supreme Court’s Ruling and Vacate the Stay Pending Appeal MOTION to Vacate filed by FORDHAM & ASSOCIATES, LLC, ROBERT GILSTRAP, ALABAMA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, TITLE ONE MANAGEMENT, LLC, H.E. CAUTHEN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT, LLC, GEORGIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, DANNY FORDHAM. Court Reporter Sara Wick (zjch) (Entered: 08/09/2021)

Plaintiffs’ notice of supplemental authority (Chrysafis), August 12, 2021

merged_60986_-1-1628832413-1

Order denying enforcement motion, August 13, 2021

AAR order denying enforcement

Plaintiffs’ emergency motion, August 14, 2021

DCC AAR emergency mo 8 14

D.C. Circuit scheduling order, August 14, 2021

DCC sched order 8 14

US opposition, August 16, 2021

DCC US vacate stay op

Plaintiffs’ reply, August 17, 2021

DCC AAR reply 8 17

D.C. Circuit order, August 20, 2021

DCC no vacate stay order 8 20

Emergency motion to vacate, No. 21A23, August 20, 2021

20210820171820764_Motion-1

Aug 20 2021 Response to application (21A23) requested by The Chief Justice, due Monday, August 23, 2021, by noon.

US response to emergency motion, August 23, 2021

20210823114141455_21A23 Response in Opposition

Plaintiffs’ reply, August 24, 2021

20210824115108497_21A23 rb

District Court opinion revised after transcript release, August 25, 2021

AAR memorandum opinion revised 8 25 21

Supreme Court opinion vacating stay, August 26, 2021

21a23_ap6c

==============

WESTERN LOUISIANA/FIFTH CIRCUIT

Chambless Enterprises v. Redfield, No. 3:20-cv-1455 (W.D. La.)

[]

Ruling, Dec. 20, 2020

Chambless ruling

Fifth Circuit # 21-30037

Statement of issues, Feb. 5, 2021

5C Chambless statement of issues

Appellants’ opening brief, March 22, 2021

5C Chambless opening brief

Appellees’ brief, April 21, 2021

5C Chambless appellees brief

Appellants’ motion to expedite appeal, April 23, 2021

5C Chambless appellant mo expedite

US response to motion to expedite appeal, April 26, 2021

5C US response mo expedite

Disability Rights Texas amicus, April 27, 2021

5C Chambless Disability Rights Texas amicus

Constitutional Accountability Center amicus, April 28, 2021

5C Chambless CAC amicus

American Academy of Pediatrics amicus, April 28, 2021

5C Chambless Am Acad Pediatrics amicus

Acadiana Legal Service amicus, April 28, 2021

5C Chambless Acadiana Legal Service amicus

Order carrying motion to expedite with the case, May 4, 2021

5C order carrying mo expedite with case

Appellants’ reply brief, May 12, 2021

5C appellants reply brief

Order affirming stay of trial-level proceedings, June 2, 2021

Chambless order affirming trial level stay 6 2 21

US notice of supplemental authority (D.C. Circuit), June 3, 2021

5C US supp auth (DCC)

US notice of one month moratorium extension, June 24, 2021

5C Chambless US notice moratorium xt

Plaintiffs’ notice of additional authority (U.S. Supreme Court), July 2, 2021

5C Chambless pltf addl auth (USC)

US notice of additional authority (Brown, 11th Cir.), July 15, 2021

5C US addl auth 11C

Plaintiffs’ notice of additional authority (Tiger Lily, 6th Cir.), July 27, 2021

5C Chambless pltf addl auth Tiger Lily

Plaintiffs’ motion for injunction pending appeal, August 18, 2021

5C Chambless mo ipa

Fifth Circuit scheduling order, August 19, 2021

5C scheduling order

US opposition to motion for injunction pending appeal, August 22, 2021

5C Chambless US response 8 22

Acadiana LS amicus, August 23, 2021

5C amicus 8 23

Plaintiffs’ additional authority (AAR), August 27, 2021

5C Chambless pltf addl authority (AAR), 8 27

Order, August 27, 2021

5C Chambless ipa order 8 27

Unopposed motion to dismiss appeal, September 9, 2021

5C Chambless unop mo dism

 

==========

NORTHERN GEORGIA/ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Brown v. Azar, No. 1:20-cv-3702 (N.D. Ga.)

[]

Order denying preliminary injunction, October 29, 2020

11303282-0–35925

Eleventh Circuit # 20-14210

Plaintiffs’ motion for injunction pending appeal, November 12, 2020

11C pltf ms ipa

US opposition to motion for injunction pending appeal, November 23, 2020

11C US ipa op

Order denying motion for injunction pending appeal,

11C ipa denial

Appellants’ brief, December 21, 2020

11C appellants br

US appellee brief, February 19, 2021

11C US appellee br

Appellants’ reply brief, March 12, 2021

11C reply br

[]

Opinion, July 14, 2021

202014210

Order withholding issuance of mandate, July 19, 2021

11C order wh issuance mandate

Petition for rehearing en banc, August 13, 2021

11C pltf pet rheb

Plaintiffs’ additional authority (U.S. Supreme Court), August 27, 2021

11C pltf addl auth AAR 8 27

US motion to dismiss appeal as moot, September 7, 2021

11C Brown mootness suggestion

Response to motion, September 9, 2021

11C Brown op to mootness dism

 

=======

NORTHERN OHIO/SIXTH CIRCUIT

Skyworks, Ltd., v. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 5:20-cv-2407 (N.D. Ohio)

[]

Opinion, March 10, 2021

Skyworks opinion and order

Declaratory judgment, March 10, 2021

Skyworks declaratory judgment

Plaintiffs’ motion and memo to clarify or amend judgment, April 7, 2021

Skyworks pltf mo clarify amend

Skyworks pltf ms clarify amend

US opposition to motion to clarify or amend, April 29, 2021

Skyworks US op to clarif amend

Notice of appeal, May 7, 2021

Skyworks US notice appeal

Plaintiffs’ reply supporting clarifying or amending judgment, May 7, 2021

Skyworks reply alter amend

Sixth Circuit #21-3443

Unopposed US motion for abeyance, May 14, 2021

6C unop mo abeyance

Abeyance order, May 14, 2021

6C abeyance order

Order and judgment clarifying judgment, June 3, 2021

Skyworks opinion and order clarifying

Skyworks judgment

US notice of appeal, June 4, 2021

US notice of appeal

Plaintiffs’ notice of cross-appeal, June 15, 2021

Skyworks pltf notice x appeal 6 15

Sixth Circuit # 21-3563

US request for extension of time, August 13, 2021

6C Skyworks US xt rq

Plaintiffs’ opposition to extension, August 17, 2021

6C Skyworks pltf op to US xt

Extension order, August 27, 2021

6C order granting extension

US unopposed motion voluntarily to dismiss appeal, September 2, 2021

6C skyworks us vol dism appeal

Voluntary dismissal order, September 3, 2021

21-3443_Documents

 

======

WESTERN TENNESSEE/SIXTH CIRCUIT

Tiger Lily LLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Housing and Urban Development, No. 2:20-cv-2692 (W.D. Tenn.)

[]

Order denying preliminary injunction, November 6, 2020

4041874-0–83601

Order, March 15, 2021

4118533-0–109474

Judgment,

4119062-0–111242

Sixth Circuit # 21-5256

Emergency motion for stay, March 18, 2021

6C emergency mo stay

Order requesting response, March 19, 2021

6C order requesting response

Plaintiffs’ opposition, March 22, 2021

6C pltf op stay

US reply, March 22, 2021

6C US reply

Plaintiffs’ supplemental response, March 23, 2021

6C plaintiffs supp resp

US additional reply, March 24, 2021

6C US addl reply

Order denying stay, March 29, 2021

6C order denying stay

US opening brief, May 12, 2021

6C US opening brief

Constitutional Accountability Center amicus, May 19, 2021

6C Constitutional Accountabilty Center amicus

Appellee brief, June 11, 2021

6C Tiger Lily appellee brief

Buckeye Institute amicus, June 18, 2021

6C Buckeye Inst amicus

US reply brief, July 16, 2021

6C US reply br

Opinion, July 23, 2021

6C Tiger Lily opinion

 

EASTERN TEXAS/FIFTH CIRCUIT

Terkel v. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 6:20-cv-564 (E.D. Tex.)

[]

Opinion, Feb. 25, 2021

12846304-0–66628

Fifth Circuit # 21-40137

Appellants’ brief, April 26, 2021

5C US ob

Constitutional Accountability Center amicus, May 3, 2021

5C CAC amicus

Desmond amicus, May 3/4, 2021

5C Desmond amicus

Texas Appleseed amicus, May 3, 2021

5C Texas Appleseed amicus

Civil Liberties Organizations amicus, May 3, 2021

5C Civil Liberties Organizations amicus

NAACP amicus, May 3/4, 2021

5C NAACP amicus

COVID-19 Eviction Defense Project amicus, May 3, 2021

5C Covid-19 Eviction Defense Project amicus

National Housing Law Project amicus, May 3, 2021

5C NHLP amicus

American Academy of Pediatrics amicus, May 3, 2021

5C American Acad Pediatrics amicus

Appellees’ brief, May 26, 2021

5C Terkel appellees brief

Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence amicus, June 2, 2021

5C CCJ amicus

Cato amicus, June 2, 2021

5C Terkel Cato amicus

Texas Apartment Association amicus, June 2, 2021

5C Texas Apartment Assn amicus

State of Texas amicus, June 2, 2021

5C Texas amicus

Buckeye Institute amicus, June 2, 2021

5C Buckeye Inst amicus

National Ass’n of Home Builders amicus, June 10, 2021

5C Natl Assn Home Builders amicus

US reply brief, June 30, 2021

5C Terkel US reply br

Texas request to participate in oral argument, August 20, 2021

5C Terkel TX mo particip OA

Order allowing Texas to participate, August 25, 2021

5C order allowing TX OA

Plaintiffs’ additional authority (AAR), August 25, 2021

5C Terkel pltf addl auth (AAR)

Plaintiffs’ additional authority (AAR, USC), August 31, 2021

5C Terkel notice supp auth AAR 8 31

US motion to dismiss appeal voluntarily, September 9, 2021

5C US mo dism 9 9

Plaintiffs’ opposition, September 13, 2021

5C Terkel op to vol dism

US reply, September 14, 2021

5C Terkel us dism reply

Order carrying motion to dismiss voluntarily with the case, September 15, 2021

5C Terkel order carrying vol dism wi case

 

===========

OTHER CASES

Other CDC cases, referenced by the U.S. in its trial-level Terkel pleadings:

Chambless Enterprises, LLC v. Redfield, No. 3:20-cv-1455 (W.D. La.)

Ruling denying motion for preliminary injunction, December 22, 2020

Chambless Enterprises order denying PI

Tiger Lily LLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Housing and Urban Development, No. 2:20-cv-2692 (W.D. Tenn.)

Order denying preliminary injunction, November 6, 2020

4041874-0–83601

[]

Sixth Circuit

but see above

Brown v. Azar, No. 1:20-cv-3702 (N.D. Ga.)

Order denying preliminary injunction, October 29, 2020

11303282-0–35925

KBW Investment Properties v. Azar, No.  2:20-cv-4852 (S.D. Ohio)

Order denying TRO, September 29, 2020

7284836-0–12189

Order dismissing case after stipulation, October 9, 2020

7305642-0–12417

 

Court of Federal Claims takings case

National Apartment Ass’n v. U.S., No. 1:21-cv-1621 (Ct. Fed. Cl.), filed July 27, 2021

Complaint

NAA v. US complaint

 

New York State eviction moratorium case

Chrysafis v. Marks, No. 2:21-cv-2516 (E.D. N.Y.)

Chrysafis v. Marks, Emergency Application for Writ of Injunction, No. 21A8 (July 27, 2021)

20210727101212346_Chrysafis v. Marks Supreme Court Application

20210727101223932_Chrysafis v. Marks Exhibits A-M

Jul 28 2021 Response to application (21A8) requested by Justice Sotomayor, due Wednesday, August 4, 2021, by 4 p.m.

New York opposition, August 4, 2021

20210804143559744_21A8 Brief in Opposition to Application

Plaintiffs’ reply, August 5, 2021

20210805142640723_Chrysafis v Marks Reply ISO Emergency Application

Aug 12 2021 Application (21A8) granted by the Court. The application for injunctive relief presented to JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and by her referred to the Court is granted pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this order shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the order shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court. This order enjoins the enforcement of only Part A of the COVID Emergency Eviction and Foreclosure Prevention Act (CEEFPA). 2020 N. Y. Laws ch. 381. That is the only relief applicants seek. See Case No. 2:21-cv-02516, ECF No. 1 at 9; Emergency App. 7, 40. If a tenant self-certifies financial hardship, Part A of CEEFPA generally precludes a landlord from contesting that certification and denies the landlord a hearing. This scheme violates the Court’s longstanding teaching that ordinarily “no man can be a judge in his own case” consistent with the Due Process Clause. In re Murchison, 349 U. S. 133, 136 (1952); see United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property, 510 U. S. 43, 53 (1993) (due process generally requires a hearing). This order does not enjoin the enforcement of the Tenant Safe Harbor Act (TSHA), which applicants do not challenge. 2020 N. Y. Laws ch. 127, §§1, 2(2)(a). Among other things, TSHA instructs New York courts to entertain a COVID-related hardship defense in eviction proceedings, assessing a tenant’s income prior to COVID, income during COVID, liquid assets, and ability to obtain government assistance. §2(2)(b). If the court finds the tenant “has suffered a financial hardship” during a statutorily-prescribed period, then it “shall [not] issue a warrant of eviction or judgment of pos-session.” §2(1). JUSTICE BREYER, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting from grant of application for injunctive relief.

Breyer dissent, August 12, 2021

21a8_3fb4

 

=======

Court of Federal Claims takings case

National Apartment Ass’n v. U.S., No. 1:21-cv-1621 (Ct. Fed. Cl.), filed July 27, 2021

Complaint

NAA v. US complaint

 

Indiana University vaccine passport case

Klaassen v. Trustees of Indiana University, No. 1:21-cv-238 (N.D. Ind., filed June 21, 2021)

Complaint

Klaassen complaint

[]

Opinion and Order, July 18, 2021

Klaassen opinion and order denying pi

Seventh Circuit # 21-2326

Trial court order denying injunction pending appeal, July 21, 2021

Klaassen order denying ipa

Emergency motion for injunction pending appeal, July 23, 2021

7C Klaassen plit emergency mo ipa

Scheduling order, July 25, 2021

7C Klaassen scheduling order

IU opposition to injunction pending appeal, July 27, 2021

7C Klaassen ipa op

Plaintiffs’ reply supporting injunction pending appeal, July 30, 2021

7C Klaassen ipa reply

Seventh Circuit order denying injunction pending appeal, August 2, 2021

7C Klaassen order

Supreme Court emergency motion for injunction, plus appendix, No. 21A15, filed August 6, 2021

20210806095541542_IU VAX SCOTUS writ of inj app FINAL

20210806095625645_IU Vax Appendix Final for Filing

Physicians for Informed Consent amicus, August 10, 2021

20210810123328658_PIC Amicus Brief for SCOTUS in Klaassen case — FINAL

Aug 12 2021 Application (21A15) denied by Justice Barrett.

IU motion to dismiss appeal, August 27, 2021

7C IU mo dism appeal 8 27

Order requesting response, August 30, 2021

7C order requesting response 8 30

Plaintiffs’ opposition to dismissing appeal, September 8, 2021

7C pltf op to dism appeal

Order denying motion to dismiss appeal, September 10, 2021

7C order denying dism

 

=====

 

Antonin Scalia Law School vaccine mandate case

Zywicki v. Washington, No. 1:21-cv-894 (E.D. Va., filed August 3, 2021)

Complaint, with attachments

Zywicki complaint

Notice of voluntary dismissal, August 20, 2021

189111461992

“So ordered,” August 20, 2021

189111462318-1

 

=======

 

CDC cases: cruise ships

The cruise ships cases are Florida v. Becerra, No. 8:21-cv-839 (M.D. Fla.), and Norwegian Cruise Lines v. Renkees, No. 1:21-cv-22492 (S.D. Fla.).  One thing Florida has challenged is the CDC’s requirement that 95% of travelers on cruise ships be vaccinated.  The cruise lines, on the other hand, challenge Florida’s law forbidding them to require vaccinations.

 

Florida v. Becerra, No. 8:21-cv-839 (M.D. Fla., filed April 8, 2021)

Complaint, with exhibits

Florida v Becerra complaint

Alaska motion to intervene, with exhibits, April 20, 2021

Alaska mo interv

Florida motion for preliminary injunction, w/o exhibits, April 22, 2021

Florida PI ms

[exhibits]

Alaska supplement to motion to intervene, April 22, 2021

Alaska supp to mo interv

Florida request for oral argument, April 22, 2021

Florida OA request

Unopposed US motion for extension of time to respond to Alaska intervention request, April 26, 2021

Unopposed US mo for xt to respond to AK mo interv

Extension order, April 26, 2021

xt order

Alaska amicus, April 26, 2021

Alaska amicus

US request for additional pages for opposition, May 3, 2021

US request addl pages

Young amicus, May 3, 2021

Young amicus

Texas intervention request, May 5, 2021

Texas interv rq

US opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, May 5, 2021

US PI op

Notice re parties’ agreement on procedure for preliminary injunction hearing, May 6, 2021

Agreement re testimony

Alaska motion to stay own intervention motion, May 7, 2021

Alaska mo stay its mo interv

05/07/2021 36  ENDORSED ORDER: Alaska moves 35 for a stay. The motion is construed as a motion for leave to amend Alaska’s motion to intervene. The motion is GRANTED. Alaska may amend the motion to intervene no later than May 21, 2021. Notwithstanding any earlier order, the defendants may respond to Alaska’s motion within seven days after Alaska amends (or elects not to amend). Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 5/7/2021. (Entered: 05/07/2021)

American Society of Travel Advisors amicus request, May 12, 2021

ASTA amicus rq

Minute entry, May 12, 2021

Minute entry 5 12 21

US opposition to amicus request, May 14, 2021

US op to amicus filing

Order re mediation, May 18, 2021

Order re mediation 5 18 21

Florida preliminary injunction reply, May 19, 2021

FL PI reply

US opposition to Texas intervention, May 19, 2021

US op to TX interv

Parties’ notice re mediation, May 20, 2021

Parties notice re mediation

Young motion to supplement amicus, May 24, 2021

Young 2d amicus

US opposition to Young amicus, May 24, 2021

US op Young supp

Young reply, May 26, 2021

FL v CDC Young supplemental reply

US request to file supplemental brief, June 2, 2021

FL v CDC US rq file supplemental

Alaska amended motion to intervene, June 2, 2021

FL v CDC Alaska amended interv mo

Plaintiffs’ response to US request, June 2, 2021

FL v CDC Fla response 6 2

Scheduling order for 6/10 hearing, June 4, 2021

FL v CDC scheduling order 6 4

US supplemental brief, June 7, 2021

US supp br 6 7 21

Florida response to supplemental brief, June 9, 2021

FL response re ratification

US response re Alaska motion, June 9, 2021

US response to Alaska 6 9

Minute entry, June 10, 2021

Minute entry 6 10 21

06/10/2021 88  Minute Entry. In Person Proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held on 6/10/2021. (LV) (Entered: 06/11/2021)
06/11/2021 85  Minute Entry. Telephonic Proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held on 6/11/2021. Despite the party’s good faith and concerted efforts, the settlement discussions have concluded and the parties have reached an impasse. (LV) (Entered: 06/11/2021)

Cruise ship opinion granting preliminary injunction, June 18, 2021

FL v US cruise ship preliminary injunction opinion

US notice of appeal, July 6, 2021

US notice of appeal 7 6 21

US motion to stay preliminary injunction pending appeal, July 6, 2021

US stay mo

Order denying motion to stay, July 7, 2021

Order denying stay 7 7

Order putting on hold Alaska and Texas motions to intervene, July 8, 2021

Deferral order 7 8

Withdrawal of Alaska motion to intervene, July 8, 2021

Alaska wdwl

07/12/2021 102  ENDORSED ORDER: The order at Doc. 101 is VACATED. The following order is SUBSTITUTED: Alaska moves 100 to withdraw the amended motion (Doc. 68) to intervene. The motion is GRANTED, and the motion to intervene is WITHDRAWN. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 7/12/2021. (Entered: 07/12/2021)

Eleventh Circuit # 21-12243

US motion for stay and administrative stay, July 7, 2021

11C US mo stay admin stay

Florida opposition to stays, July 12, 2021

11C FL stays op

US reply supporting stays, July 13, 2021

11C US stays reply

Order for stay, July 17, 2021

11C stay order 7 17 21

Emergency application to vacate stay, No. 21A5, July 23, 2021

20210723134720313_Application

Eleventh Circuit order vacating own stay order, July 23, 2021

11C vacate own order

Florida emergency motion, July 24, 2021

Florida mo to enforce inj

07/24/2021 111  AMENDED ENDORSED ORDER: Florida moves (Doc. 108 and 109) to enforce the preliminary injunction (Doc. 91) against the defendants. No later than 9:00 a.m. EDT on Monday, July 26, 2021, the defendants must respond in writing to Florida’s motion. A hearing will occur on Monday, July 26, 2021, at 12:01 p.m. by electronic means (probably a ZOOM hearing). The parties will receive timely notice of the details of the hearing. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 7/24/2021. (Entered: 07/24/2021)

US opposition to emergency motion, July 25, 2021

FL cruise ship US resp to emergency mo

Order deferring ruling, July 26, 2021

FL cruise ship order deferring consideration

Order allowing Texas intervention, July 29, 2021

047123287192-3

Order directing Texas to file its complaint, August 2, 2021

047123297985

Texas complaint in intervention, August 4, 2021

TX cruise ships complaint in interv

Unopposed request for extension of time to answer, August 9, 2021

047123325207

Order for extension, August 11, 2021

047123331664

==============

Norwegian Cruise Lines v. Rivkees, No. 1:21-cv-22492 (S.D. Fla., filed July 13, 2021)

Complaint

21271565-0–78317

Motion for preliminary injunction, July 13, 2021

merged_42975_-1-1626288951

[]

Scheduling order, July 16, 2021

21287050-0–108253

Motion for transfer, July 16, 2021

21288685-0–108600

07/18/2021 29  PAPERLESS ORDER. This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Expedited Motion To Transfer 28 . By no later than July 30, 2021, Plaintiffs shall file a response in opposition to the Motion 28 . By no later than August 4, 2021, Defendant may file a reply in support of the Motion 28 . Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 7/18/2021. (clu) (Entered: 07/18/2021)

Florida opposition to preliminary injunction, July 27, 2021

Norw FL op to PI

Norw FL op to PI aff 1

[Other exhibits]

Plaintiffs’ reply supporting preliminary injunction, July 30, 2021

Norw PI reply

Plaintiffs’ opposition to transfer, July 30, 2021

Norw op to transfer

Florida motion to dismiss, August 4, 2021

Norwegian FL mo dism

Florida reply supporting transfer, August 4, 2021

Norwegian FL transfer reply

08/05/2021 41  PAPERLESS ORDER. The preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for August 6, 2021 at 10:00 AM will be conducted by videoconference. To observe, please use the link: https://www.zoomgov.com/j/1613543192?pwd=RGJGU3ZKVytMbDNxenNmQlUvaVRFdz09 and the Passcode 923561. Interested members of the public are welcome to observe the proceeding.

 

Observers are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, live streaming and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, contempt of court, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the court. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 8/5/2021. (clu) Modified on 8/5/2021 (mso). (Entered: 08/05/2021)

08/06/2021 42  PAPERLESS Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kathleen M. Williams: Video Zoom Motion Hearing held on 8/6/2021 re: DE # 3 Plaintiff’s MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Plaintiffs’ Expedited Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd, NCL ( Bahamas) Ltd., Seven Seas Cruises S. DE R.L. LLC, Oceania Cruises S. De R.L. Court heard oral argument. Matter taken under advisement. Counsel of record present. Court Reporter: Patricia Sanders, 305-523-5548 / Patricia_Sanders@flsd.uscourts.gov. (mso) (Entered: 08/06/2021)

Order granting preliminary injunction, August 8, 2021

21354071-0–119331

Order denying transfer, August 8, 2021

21354074-0–121296

Rivkees notice of appeal, August 10, 2021

Norwegian FL notice appeal

Eleventh Circuit # 21-12729

 

Norwegian opposition to motion to dismiss, August 18, 2021

Norwegian dism op

Agreement on staying deadlines pending appeal, August 20, 2021

21395712-0–64572

The Title 42 case

Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, No. 1:21-cv-100 (D. D.C.)

[]

08/24/2021

51  PAPERLESS ORDER granting the Parties’ joint motion to stay all deadlines pending appeal 49 . For good cause shown, the motion 49 is GRANTED. This matter is STAYED pending the resolution of Defendant’s appeal of the preliminary injunction 43 to the Eleventh Circuit. The Parties shall file a joint status report regarding further proceedings in this case no later than 30 days after the Eleventh Circuit issues its ruling. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 8/24/2021. (clu) (Entered: 08/24/2021)

==================

The Title 42 case

Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, No. 1:21-cv-100 (D. D.C.)

Complaint, January 12, 2021

6914627-0–70536

[]

Amended complaint, January 28, 2021

HH amended complaint

Motion to certify class, January 28, 2021

HH class cert mo

[]

Motion for preliminary injunction, February 5, 2021

HH PI mo

[]

US opposition to class certification and preliminary injunction, February 17, 2021

HH US op

[]

Joint motion for four week abeyance, February 23, 2021

HH joint abeyance mo 2 23

[]

05/17/2021   MINUTE ORDER granting 106 joint motion to continue to hold in abeyance Plaintiffs’ Motions for Class Certification and Classwide Permanent Injunction. Plaintiffs shall file their reply in support of their motions for class certification and preliminary injunction by no later than May 25, 2021. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 5/17/2021. (lcegs3) (Entered: 05/17/2021)

[]

08/02/2021   MINUTE ORDER. In view of 112 joint motion to reset briefing schedule, in which the parties indicated that efforts “to resolve or narrow the dispute in this case have reached an impasse,” the parties are DIRECTED to file a joint status report by no later than August 4, 2021 informing the Court whether this case would benefit from referral to a magistrate judge, mediation, or any other form of alternative dispute resolution that can be tailored to the needs of their case. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 8/2/2021. (lcegs3) (Entered: 08/02/2021)

[]

Reply supporting class certification and preliminary injunction, August 11, 2021

HH reply cc pi

[]

Opinion and order, September 16, 2021

7340062-0–87382

7340049-0–85121

Notice of appeal, September 17, 2021

[]

D.C. Cir. # 21-5200

US emergency motion for stay, September 17, 2021

DCC HH US emergency stay mo

Scheduling order, September 18, 2021

DCC HH scheduling order

 

 

P.J.E.S. v. Wolf, No. 1:20-cv-2245 (D. D.C.)

[]

Preliminary injunction opinion and order, November 18, 2020

PJES preliminary injunction opinion

PJES class cert and pi order

US motion for reconsideration, November 25, 2020

PJES US recon mo

12/03/2020   MINUTE ORDER denying the Government’s 82 MOTION for Reconsideration and finding as moot the Government’s 85 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Declaration. The Government renews its request that the Court stay its preliminary injunction issued on November 18, 2020, contending that, inter alia, (1) given the rise in COVID-19 infections in States along the southern border, “enjoining the CDC Order [that allows for the expulsion of class members pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 265] at this juncture would create or exacerbate conditions conducive to further COVID-19 outbreaks,” Gov’t’s Mot., ECF No. 82 at 9-10; (2) the increase in the number of unaccompanied minors, could lead to “hospital systems in some localities ” to be overwhelmed; id. at 11; and (3) the “recent increases in the number of referrals to” the Office of Refugee Resettlement (“ORR”), during the pandemic, could lead to “greater challenges in accommodating the expected increases in referrals of covered minors,” and potentially force ORR transport class members further inland, id. at 12-15. The Government states that it is “not seeking reconsideration of this Court’s order granting Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, ECF No. 15, or provisionally granting Plaintiff’s motion to certify a class, ECF No. 2.” Gov’t’s Mot., ECF No. 82 at 4 n.2. In opposition, the Plaintiff argues that “[the Government’s] failure to contest the Court’s merits ruling is an arguably fatal flaw for a stay application and should be determinative here… particularly given [the Government’s] additional failure to contest the irreparable harm to the children.” Pl.’s Opp’n, ECF No. 84 at 5 (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Plaintiff also contends that (1) no class member in ORR custody has required hospitalization due to COVID-19, see id. at 5; (2) the Government’s speculation that there will be an increase in the number of unaccompanied children entering the country “is riddled with inconsistencies and misdirection,” id. at 7; and (3) the Government has “not demonstrated that [U.S. Customs & Border Protection] or ORR facilities lack additional capacity to hold children even if the numbers substantially increase,” id. at 9. In this Court, motions for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are examined under the “standard set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e)”. United States v. Fareri, No. CR 09-54 (EGS), 2018 WL 8754169, at *2 (D.D.C. Oct. 19, 2018) (Sullivan, J.). Under that standard, a Rule 59(e) motion-and in this case a 54(b) motion-“need not be granted unless the district court finds that there is an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice.” Id. As the Government is requesting that the Court reconsider its denial of a stay of its November 18, 2020 preliminary injunction, the Court will review the Government’s motion using the factors governing the granting of a stay pending an appeal. A “stay pending [an] appeal is always an extraordinary remedy,” United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 988, 990 (D.D.C. 2006) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted); and the “party requesting a stay bears the burden of showing that the circumstances justify an exercise of that discretion,” Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 43334 (2009). In determining whether to grant a stay pending an appeal, a Court must consider “(1) whether the applicant has made a strong showing that [it] is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies.” Nken, 556 U.S. at 34. Of these, the “first two factors of the traditional standard are the most critical.” Id. Here, the Government clearly has not met its burden. Even though the “first two factors of the traditional [stay] standard are the most critical,” id.; the Government does not even consider the first stay factor-likelihood of success on the merits, see generally, Gov’t’s Mot., ECF No. 82-nor does it sufficiently explain how it will be “irreparably injured absent a stay,” see id. (stating only “any increase in the transfer of class members into [border] States’ health care systems is likely to cause irreparable harm to the public”). The Government also fails to address the final two factors- whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding, and where the public interest lies. See generally, Gov’t’s Mot., ECF No. 82. Because the Court finds that the Government did not note any intervening change of controlling law, provide sufficient new evidence concerning the stay factors, or point out any clear error or manifest injustice, see Fareri, 2018 WL 8754169, at *2, it is ORDERED that the Government’s motion for reconsideration, ECF No. 82, is DENIED. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 12/3/2020. (lcegs2) (Entered: 12/03/2020)

[]

D.C. Circuit # 20-5357

Order for stay, January 29, 2021

DCC PJES stay order

Appellants’ opening brief (corrected), February 22, 2021

DCC PJES corrected OB

Joint request to suspend briefing schedule, March 1, 2021

DCC PJES joint mo suspend briefing