USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 1 of 11
`
`NETCHOICE, LLC, et al.,
`Plaintiffs-Appellees,
`
`ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF
`FLORIDA, et al.,
`
`Defendants-Appellants.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND THE STAY
`OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE MANDATE
`As the Court is aware, this case involves Florida’s social media law that, like
`
`
`
`No. 21-12355
`
`
`
`
`
`a pending appeal in the Fifth Circuit involving a similar law from Texas, presents
`
`“issues of great importance that will plainly merit [Supreme Court] review.”
`
`NetChoice v. Paxton, 142 S. Ct. 1715, 1715-16 (2022) (Alito, J., dissenting from
`
`grant of application to vacate stay); see also id. at 1715 (granting application). The
`
`parties share the view that further review in the Supreme Court is warranted. Given
`
`that aim, the parties jointly sought a stay of the issuance of the mandate, which this
`
`Court granted on June 22, 2022. Under this Court’s order, the stay remains in force
`
`“to and including August 22, 2022” or until the “final disposition of the case” once
`
`certiorari is sought.
`
`Since then, Florida sought and received a 30-day extension of time in which
`
`to file a petition for certiorari. Florida’s petition is now due on September 21, 2022.
`
`
`
`NETCHOICE, LLC, et al.,
`Plaintiffs-Appellees,
`
`ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF
`FLORIDA, et al.,
`
`Defendants-Appellants.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND THE STAY
`OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE MANDATE
`As the Court is aware, this case involves Florida’s social media law that, like
`
`
`
`No. 21-12355
`
`
`
`
`
`a pending appeal in the Fifth Circuit involving a similar law from Texas, presents
`
`“issues of great importance that will plainly merit [Supreme Court] review.”
`
`NetChoice v. Paxton, 142 S. Ct. 1715, 1715-16 (2022) (Alito, J., dissenting from
`
`grant of application to vacate stay); see also id. at 1715 (granting application). The
`
`parties share the view that further review in the Supreme Court is warranted. Given
`
`that aim, the parties jointly sought a stay of the issuance of the mandate, which this
`
`Court granted on June 22, 2022. Under this Court’s order, the stay remains in force
`
`“to and including August 22, 2022” or until the “final disposition of the case” once
`
`certiorari is sought.
`
`Since then, Florida sought and received a 30-day extension of time in which
`
`to file a petition for certiorari. Florida’s petition is now due on September 21, 2022.
`
`
`
`USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 2 of 11
`
`
`
`Accordingly, and for the same reasons that the Court initially stayed the issuance of
`
`the mandate, the parties request that this Court extend the stay “to and including
`
`September 21, 2022” or until the “final disposition of the case” once certiorari is
`
`sought.
`
`s/Henry C. Whitaker
`HENRY C. WHITAKER
`Solicitor General
`EVAN EZRAY
`Deputy Solicitor General
`Office of the Attorney General
`The Capitol, PL-01
`Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050
`(850) 414-3300
`henry.whitaker@myfloridalegal.com
`
`CHARLES J. COOPER
`DAVID H. THOMPSON
`BRIAN W. BARNES
`JOSEPH O. MASTERMAN
`JOHN W. TIENKEN
`Cooper & Kirk, PLLC
`1523 New Hampshire Ave., NW
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`RAYMOND F. TREADWELL
`Chief Deputy General Counsel
`Executive Office of the Governor
`Office of the General Counsel
`The Capitol, PL-05
`Tallahassee, FL 32399
`
`Counsel for Defendants-Appellants
`
`August 18, 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`s/Paul D. Clement
`PAUL D. CLEMENT
` Counsel of Record
`CLEMENT & MURPHY PLLC
`706 Duke Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`paul.clement@clementmurphy.com
`
`K. WINN ALLEN
`KASDIN M. MITCHELL
`JAMES Y. XI
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20004
`(202) 389-5000
`
`BRIAN M. WILLEN
`STEFFEN N. JOHNSON
`LAUREN G. WHITE
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH
` & ROSATI, P.C.
`1700 K Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`
`PETER KARANJIA
`DLA PIPER LLP (US)
`500 Eighth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`ILANA H. EISENSTEIN
`DLA PIPER LLP (US)
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 3 of 11
`
`One Liberty Place
`1650 Market Street, Suite 5000
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`
`Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellees
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 4 of 11
`No. 21-12355, NetChoice LLC, et al. v. Attorney General, State of Florida, et al.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS
`AND CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
`
`Pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 26.1, Appellants hereby certify that they have no
`
`parent corporation and that no publicly held corporation owns ten percent or
`
`more of their stock.
`
`Pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 26.1, Appellants certify that the following is
`
`a complete
`
`list of attorneys, persons, associations of persons, firms,
`
`partnerships, or corporations that have an interest in the outcome of this particular
`
`case on appeal:
`
`1. Allen, Jason Todd, Defendant/Appellant
`
`2. Allen, Kenneth Winn, Attorney for Plaintiffs/Appellees
`
`3. American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, Amicus Curiae
`
`4. American Civil Liberties Union, Amicus Curiae
`
`5. Authors Guild Inc., Amicus Curiae
`
`6. Barnes, Brian W., Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`7. Bassett, Glenn Allen, Attorney for Defendants/Appellants
`
`8. Bell, Daniel William, Attorney for Defendants/Appellants
`
`9. Blacklock, Evelyn, Attorney for Plaintiffs/Appellees
`
`10. Burhans Jr., Glenn T., Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`11. Carome, Patrick J., Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`C-1 of 6
`
`
`
` USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 5 of 11
`No. 21-12355, NetChoice LLC, et al. v. Attorney General, State of Florida, et al.
`
`12. Center for Democracy and Technology, Amicus Curiae
`
`13. Chamber of Progress, Amicus Curiae
`
`14. Clark, Christopher Roy, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`15. Clement, Paul D., Attorney for Plaintiffs/Appellees
`
`16. Computer & Communications Industry Association, Plaintiff
`
`17. Connected Commerce Council, Amicus Curiae
`
`18. Consumer Technology Association, Amicus Curiae
`
`19. Cooper, Charles J., Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`20. Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, Attorneys for Defendant/Appellant
`
`21. DLA Piper US LLP, Attorneys for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`22. Eisenstein, Ilana Hope, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`23. Electronic Frontier Foundation, Amicus Curiae
`
`24. Engine Advocacy, Amicus Curiae
`
`25. Esparza, Servando, Declarant
`
`26. Fabens-Lassen, Ben, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`27. Florida Department of Management Services, Defendant/Appellant
`
`28. Florida Elections Commission, Defendant/Appellant
`
`29. Florida Office of the Attorney General, Attorneys for Defendants/Appellants
`
`30. Gillespie, Patrick, Defendant/Appellant
`
`31. Goldstein, Leonid, Amicus Curiae
`
`C-2 of 6
`
`
`
` USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 6 of 11
`No. 21-12355, NetChoice LLC, et al. v. Attorney General, State of Florida, et al.
`
`32. Green, Jonathan Allen, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`33. Greene, David Allen, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`34. Hayes, John Martin, Defendant/Appellant
`
`35. Hinkle, Judge Robert L., District Court Judge
`
`36. Holtzblatt, Ari, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`37. Homer, Bonner, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae
`
`38. Homer, Peter Winslow, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`39. Hopkins, Christopher, Attorney for Amici Curiae
`
`40. Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, Amicus Curiae
`
`41. Internet Association, Amicus Curiae
`
`42. Johnson, Steffen N., Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`43. Karanjia, Peter, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`44. Kilby, Douglas Lamar, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`45. Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Appellees
`
`46. Mackey, Aaron, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`47. Masterman, Joseph, Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`48. McDonald Hopkins LLC, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae
`
`49. Media Law Resource Center Inc, Amicus Curiae
`
`50. Mitchell, Kasdin M., Attorney for Plaintiffs/Appellees
`
`51. Moody, Ashley B., Defendant/Appellant
`
`C-3 of 6
`
`
`
` USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 7 of 11
`No. 21-12355, NetChoice LLC, et al. v. Attorney General, State of Florida, et al.
`
`52. Morrison, Danielle T., Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`53. National Black Justice Coalition, Amicus Curiae
`
`54. NetChoice LLC, Plaintiff
`
`55. Oprison, Christopher George, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`56. Opsahl, Kurt, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`57. Pavlovic, Corinne, Declarant
`
`58. Pen American Center Inc., Amicus Curiae
`
`59. Phillips, Joseph Trumon, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`60. Poitier, Joni Alexis, Defendant/Appellant
`
`61. Potts, Neil, Declarant
`
`62. Progressive Policy Institute, Amicus Curiae
`
`63. Protect Democracy Project, Inc., Amicus Curiae
`
`64. Reporters Committee For Freedom of the Press, Amicus Curiae
`
`65. Rumenap, Stacie D., Declarant
`
`66. Schruers, Matthew, Declarant
`
`67. Shullman, Deanna K, Attorney for Amici Curiae
`
`68. Shullman, Fugate PLLC, Attorneys for Amici Curiae
`
`69. Siekkinen, Nury Agudo, Attorney for Amici Curiae
`
`70. Smith, Kymberlee Curry, Defendant/Appellant
`
`71. Smitha, Bridget Kellogg, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`C-4 of 6
`
`
`
` USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 8 of 11
`No. 21-12355, NetChoice LLC, et al. v. Attorney General, State of Florida, et al.
`
`72. Stearns Weaver Miller Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A., Attorneys for
`
`Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`73. Szabo, Carl, Declarant
`
`74. Szoka, Berin Michael, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`75. TechFreedom, Amicus Curiae
`
`76. Technet, Amicus Curiae
`
`77. Thompson, David H., Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`78. Tienken, John W., Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`79. Treadwell, Raymond Frederick, Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`80. Uthmeier, James William, Attorney for Defendant/Appellant
`
`81. Veitch, Alexandra, Declarant
`
`82. Walters Law Group, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae
`
`83. Walters, Lawrence G, Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`84. Washington Center for Technology Policy Inclusion, Amicus Curiae
`
`85. Whitaker, Henry C., Attorney for Defendants/Appellants
`
`86. White, Lauren Gallo, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`87. Willen, Brian M., Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`88. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Attorneys for Amicus
`
`Curiae
`
`89. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Attorneys for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`C-5 of 6
`
`
`
` USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 9 of 11
`No. 21-12355, NetChoice LLC, et al. v. Attorney General, State of Florida, et al.
`
`90. Winship, Blaine H., Attorney for Defendants/Appellants
`
`91. Wolfson, Paul R., Attorney for Amicus Curiae
`
`92. Xi, James, Attorney for Plaintiffs/Appellees
`
`93. Yang, Meng Jia, Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee
`
`94. ZwillGen, Attorneys for Amici Curiae
`
`C-6 of 6
`
`
`
`USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 10 of 11
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`I hereby certify that this motion complies with the type-volume limitation of
`
`Fed. R. App. P. 27(d)(2)(A) because it contains 212 words.
`
`August 18, 2022
`
`s/Henry C. Whitaker
`Henry C. Whitaker
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`USCA11 Case: 21-12355 Date Filed: 08/18/2022 Page: 11 of 11
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that on August 18, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing
`
`with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
`
`Circuit by using the CM/ECF system. I certify that all participants in this case are
`
`registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF
`
`system.
`
`August 18, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`s/Henry C. Whitaker
`Henry C. Whitaker
`
`
`
`
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
