`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 20-cv-02658 (CJN)
`
`
`TIKTOK INC., et al.,
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`v.
`
`DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity
`as President of the United States, et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFFS’ RENEWED MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
`AGAINST COMMERCE DEPARTMENT PROHIBITIONS 2-5
`
`Plaintiffs TikTok, Inc. and ByteDance Ltd. (collectively “Plaintiffs”), by and through
`
`their undersigned counsel, hereby move this Court, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure and Local Rule 65.1, for a preliminary injunction against Defendants Donald J.
`
`Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., in his official
`
`capacity as Secretary of Commerce; and the U.S. Department of Commerce.
`
`For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum in Support, the declarations
`
`attached hereto, and the declarations and exhibits attached to Plaintiffs’ previous motion for
`
`preliminary injunction (ECF No. 15), Plaintiffs are entitled to preliminary injunctive relief
`
`enjoining the implementation or enforcement of Prohibitions 2–5 on the list of prohibited
`
`transactions published in the Federal Register on September 24, 2020. See Identification of
`
`Prohibited Transactions to Implement Executive Order 13942 and Address the Threat Posed by
`
`TikTok and the National Emergency with Respect to the Information and Communications
`
`Technology and Services Supply Chain, 85 Fed. Reg. 60061–63 (Sept. 24, 2020).
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-02658-CJN Document 43 Filed 10/14/20 Page 2 of 2
`
`Like the first Prohibition that this Court enjoined on September 27, 2020, Plaintiffs are
`
`likely to succeed on their claim that Prohibitions 2–5 violate the International Emergency
`
`Economics Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701–1706. Plaintiffs also are likely to succeed on their
`
`claims that the Prohibitions violate the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq., the
`
`First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and constitute ultra vires executive action.
`
`In the absence of preliminary injunctive relief, Prohibitions 2–5 will cause Plaintiffs irreparable
`
`harm, and the equities and public interest weigh in Plaintiffs’ favor. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are
`
`entitled to relief. A proposed Order accompanies the motion.
`
`
`
`DATED: October 14, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
` /s/ John E. Hall
`
`Anders Linderot*
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`The New York Times Building
`620 Eighth Avenue
`New York, New York 10018-1405
`Telephone: +1 (212) 841-1000
`Facsimile: + 1 (212) 841-1010
`Email: alinderot@cov.com
`
`Mitchell A. Kamin*
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 3500
`Los Angeles, California 90067-4643
`Telephone: + 1 (424) 332-4800
`Facsimile: + 1 (424) 332-4749
`Email: mkamin@cov.com
`
`*Pro Hac Vice
`
`
`
`
`
`John E. Hall (D.C. Bar. No. 415364)
`Beth S. Brinkmann (D.C. Bar. No. 477771)
`Alexander A. Berengaut (D.C. Bar. No. 989222)
`Megan A. Crowley (D.C. Bar. No. 1049027)
`Megan C. Keenan (D.C. Bar. No. 1672508)
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`One CityCenter
`850 Tenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`Telephone: +1 (202) 662-6000
`Facsimile: + 1 (202) 778-6000
`Email: jhall@cov.com
` bbrinkmann@cov.com
` aberengaut@cov.com
` mcrowley@cov.com
` mkeenan@cov.com
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`
`2
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
