Blessed Cajuns LLC v. Guzman — N.D. Tex., Fort Worth, No. 4:21-cv-00677-O

Case summary

Blessed Cajuns LLC and other restaurant and hospitality businesses and their owners sued Isabella Casillas Guzman, in her individual and official capacities as administrator of the Small Business Administration, and the SBA in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, No. 4:21-cv-00677-O. The second amended complaint challenges section 5003(c)(3)(A) of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which during the first twenty-one days of the Restaurant Revitalization Fund required the administrator to prioritise awarding grants to businesses owned by women and racial minorities, as unconstitutional and as a violation of Title VI. The court entered a preliminary-injunction order on May 28, 2021 as to the original named plaintiffs. The plaintiffs dismissed the action under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) on February 28, 2022.

Case at a glance

What does the complaint allege?

That section 5003 of the American Rescue Plan Act appropriated $28.6 billion to create the Restaurant Revitalization Fund and required the administrator, during the first twenty-one days of the program beginning May 3, 2021, to prioritise awarding grants to businesses owned by women and racial minorities, and that these race and sex preferences were the but-for cause of two plaintiffs' failure to obtain relief. It states that the SBA announced on June 30, 2021 that it was closing the Fund because the $28.6 billion allocated to it was exhausted.

What relief was sought?

A declaration that section 5003(c)(3)(A) is unconstitutional, a declaration that the SBA and the administrator violated named plaintiffs' constitutional rights, damages against Administrator Guzman in her individual capacity under Bivens, a permanent injunction against recovering RRF funds disbursed to the plaintiffs contrary to section 5003(c)(3)(A), and costs and attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

How did the case end?

The plaintiffs filed a notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) on February 28, 2022, dismissing without prejudice with each party bearing its own costs and fees. The complaint records that, after the preliminary-injunction order of May 28, 2021, the defendants represented that they would cease processing all priority applications until the SBA completed processing all previously filed non-priority applications, and only then if the Fund was not first exhausted.

Summary written from the documents on this page; every sentence is sourced.