Cargill v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

District Court, W.D. Texas·Decided November 14, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-01063·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

MICHAEL CARGILL; CTC HGC, § LLC, § Plaintiffs § § No. 1:22-CV-01063-DAE v. § § BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, § TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND § EXPLOSIVES, STEVEN § DETTELBACH, IN HIS OFFICIAL § CAPACITY; MERRICK B. § GARLAND, IN HIS OFFICIAL § CAPACITY; UNITED STATES § DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, § UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, § Defendants §

ORDER

The parties dispute whether Plaintiffs should be entitled to discovery in support of the ultra vires claim they assert against Defendants. Dkt. 44 (The Parties’ Joint Statement on Discovery Positions); see Dkt. 1, at 13-14 (Count III of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, seeking “Equitable Relief for an Ongoing Violation of Federal Law”). The District Judge referred the matter to the undersigned to resolve the discovery dispute and to enter a scheduling order setting a schedule for the parties’ anticipated cross- motions for summary judgment. Dkt. 41. The Court set the matter for hearing, and after considering the parties’ filings, their arguments at the hearing, and the applicable law, the Court concluded that Plaintiffs are entitled to limited discovery in support of their equitable cause of action. See, e.g., Texas v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. 6:23-CV-00007, 2023 WL 2842760, at *3 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 7, 2023) (“One type of suit that can proceed against federal officers in their official capacities is a suit alleging a federal officer acted ultra vires of statutorily delegated authority. This is exactly the type of claim the Plaintiff States raise in their complaint. ... Therefore, the Court will permit extra-record discovery on the Plaintiff States’ ultra vires claim.” (internal citations, quotations, and modifications omitted)). Accordingly, for the reasons stated on the record, the Court ORDERS the following schedule for discovery and for summary-judgment briefing:

Judgment (20-page limit)

Summary Judgment and Opposition (40-page limit)

Reply (80-page limit)

SIGNED November 14, 2023.

“DUSTINM.HOWELL —“—i—_COC~™S UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cargill v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, (W.D. Tex. 2023).

Cargill v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (Cargill v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.