Case docket

Creation Entertainment, Inc. v. Small Business Administration — D.D.C., No. 22-0684 (ABJ)

Creation Entertainment, Inc. v. Small Business Administration — D.D.C., No. 22-0684 (ABJ) — 2 documents in the archive, dated February 6, 2026 to March 5, 2026.

Case facts

Court	U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Docket number	No. 1:22-cv-00684 — main docket · CourtListener docket 63154365
Filings	2 public filings
Filed	2026-02-06 – 2026-03-05
Original PDFs	2 of 2
Profiles	Kelly Loeffler

Case summary

Creation Entertainment, Inc. brought this action against the Small Business Administration in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 22-0684 (ABJ), under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706, and the Declaratory Judgment Act, over a Shuttered Venue Operators Grant application. This page carries two filings. In an answer filed February 6, 2026 the SBA and Administrator Kelly Loeffler respond to the second amended complaint, admitting that the SBA and the Administrator administer the SVOG program, that the plaintiff applied for SVOG funds and that the denial letter and a letter of December 18, 2025 are final agency action, while denying that the plaintiff demonstrated eligibility for an award. The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on March 5, 2026. No ruling is on this page.

Case at a glance

Parties	Plaintiff: Creation Entertainment, Inc. Defendants: Small Business Administration and Administrator Kelly Loeffler
Court and docket	U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 22-0684 (ABJ) (1:22-cv-00684-ABJ)
Program	Shuttered Venue Operators Grant (SVOG) program, which the answer admits the SBA administers alongside Administrator Loeffler
Claims	As identified in the answer to the second amended complaint: Count I, arbitrary and capricious agency action, and Count II, unlawful withholding of agency action, in an action brought under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706, and the Declaratory Judgment Act. The defendants deny the allegations of both counts and deny that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested or to any relief
Disposition or status	Undecided on this page. The answer to the second amended complaint was filed February 6, 2026 and the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Civil Rule 7(h) on March 5, 2026. No order or opinion is on this page
Status checked	2026-09-23 · against DOJ press releases through 2026-09-22; court docket not yet read

What does the answer admit?

That the SBA, alongside Administrator Loeffler, administers the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant program; that the plaintiff applied for SVOG funds; that SVOG funds are limited; that the court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 subject to its terms and limitations; that venue is appropriate; that the denial letter represents final agency action; and that the December 18, 2025 letter constitutes a final agency action.

What does the answer deny?

That the plaintiff demonstrated its eligibility for an award, the allegations of Count I and Count II, and that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested or to any relief whatsoever. It states that any allegation not specifically admitted, denied or otherwise responded to is denied.

What is the current posture?

The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on March 5, 2026 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Civil Rule 7(h), relying on an accompanying memorandum of points and authorities and the administrative record. Neither that memorandum nor any ruling on the motion is on this page.

Docket

2 documents in docket-entry order; attachments follow their entry. Gaps name the entries we do not have.

No. 1:22-cv-00684

2026-02-06Answer to Second Amended Complaint — Creation Entertainment v. SBA (D.D.C.)Entry 61
—Entry 62 is not in the archive
2026-03-05Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment — Creation Entertainment, Inc. v. SBA (D.D.C.)Entry 63