Answer to Second Amended Complaint — Creation Entertainment v. SBA (D.D.C.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia · No. 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ · Doc. 61 · 2026-02-06 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 
 
CREATION ENTERTAINMENT, INC., 
 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
 
v. 
 
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, 
 
 
 
Defendant. 
 
Civil Action No. 22-0684 (ABJ) 
ANSWER 
  
Defendants Small Business Administration (“SBA”) and Administrator Kelly Loeffler 
(collectively “Defendants”), by and through the undersigned counsel, respond as follows to the 
separately numbered paragraphs and prayer for relief in Plaintiff Creation Entertainment’s Second 
Amended Complaint, ECF No. 59, in this case brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure 
Act.  5 U.S.C. § 706.  Any allegations not specifically admitted, denied, or otherwise responded to 
below are hereby denied.  To the extent the Second Amended Complaint refers to or quotes from 
external documents, statutes, or other sources, Defendants may refer to such materials for their 
complete and accurate contents, but such references are not intended to be, and should not be 
construed as, an admission that the cited materials are (a) correctly cited or quoted by Plaintiff, 
(b) relevant to this, or any other, action, or (c) admissible in this, or any other, action.  
Defendant responds to the separately numbered paragraphs as follows: 
 
 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 1 of 9

- 2 - 
INTRODUCTION1 
1. 
This paragraph consists of Plaintiff’s characterization of this lawsuit, which 
requires no response. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that 
Plaintiff purports to bring this action pursuant to the Administrative Procedure and Declaratory 
Judgment Acts. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph. 
2. 
The first sentence of this paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent 
a response is deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the 
best evidence of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.  As to 
the second sentence, Defendants admit that SBA, alongside Administrator Loeffler, administers 
the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant (“SVOG”) Program. 
3. 
Defendants admit that Plaintiff applied for SVOG funds. Defendants deny the 
remaining allegations in this paragraph and specifically deny that Plaintiff demonstrated its 
eligibility for an award. 
4. 
Admit 
5. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response. To the 
extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
6. 
Deny. 
7. 
Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 
of the allegations in this paragraph. 
 
1  
For ease of reference, this Answer replicates the headings contained in the Second 
Amended Complaint.  Although Defendants believe that such headings require no response, to the 
extent a response is deemed required and those headings and titles could be construed to contain 
factual allegations, those allegations are denied. 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 2 of 9

- 3 - 
8. 
Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 
of the allegations in this paragraph. 
9. 
Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 
of the allegations in this paragraph. 
10. 
Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 
of the allegations in this paragraph. 
11. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response. To the 
extent a response is deemed required, defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph.  
12. 
Defendants admit that SVOG funds are limited and deny that Plaintiff demonstrated 
eligibility for such funds. 
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 
13. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response.  To the 
extent a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that this Court has jurisdiction subject to 
the terms and limitations of 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 
14. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response.  To the 
extent a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that the denial letter represents a final 
agency action.  
15. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response. To the 
extent a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that venue is appropriate in this judicial 
district. 
16. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response. To the 
extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 3 of 9

- 4 - 
PARTIES 
17. 
Plaintiff’s allegation that it is a live performance arts operator is a legal conclusion 
that requires no response. To the extent a response is deemed required, deny that Plaintiff is  a live 
performance arts operator.  Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief 
as to the truth of the remaining allegations in this paragraph. 
18. 
Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 
of the remaining allegations in this paragraph. 
19. 
Defendants admit that that Small Business Administration is a federal agency within 
the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 706. 
20. 
Defendants admit that Kelly Loeffler is the Administrator of SBA, and that Plaintiff 
purports to sue her in her official capacity. 
BACKGROUND 
 
A. 
Shuttered Venue Operators Grant Program 
 
21. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
22. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
23. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 4 of 9

- 5 - 
24. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
25. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
26. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
27. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
28. 
Admit. 
29. 
Admit. 
30. 
This paragraph purports to characterize a statute.  To the extent a response is 
deemed required, Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the cited statute as the best evidence 
of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent with its plain meaning.   
B. 
Creation’s SVOG Application and SBA’s Denial 
 
31. 
Admit. 
32. 
Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 
of the allegations in this paragraph regarding how Plaintiff learned of its application denial.  
Defendants admit the Plaintiff’s SVOG application was denied but deny that no reason was given 
for the denial. 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 5 of 9

- 6 - 
33. 
Defendants admit that Plaintiff’s submitted an administrative appeal but deny the 
remaining allegations in this paragraph. 
34. 
Defendants admit that Plaintiff’s administrative appeal was denied but deny the 
remaining allegations in this paragraph. 
35. 
Admit. 
36. 
Defendants admit that they issued a new denial decision on July 2, 2022.  As to the 
remaining allegations in this paragraph, Defendants refer the Court to the denial letter as the best 
evidence of its contents and deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
37. 
Deny. 
38. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of its July 14, 2022 letter.  Defendants 
respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and deny any allegations 
inconsistent therewith. 
39. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of an August 22, 2022 response from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the response as the best evidence of its contents 
and deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
40. 
Defendants admit they rescinded the prior decision on or about July 7, 2025. 
Defendants deny the remaining allegations of the paragraph to the extent they are inconsistent with 
the notice of recission or direction of this Court. 
41. 
Admit. 
42. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 6 of 9

- 7 - 
43. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
44. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
45. 
Deny. 
46. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
47. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
48. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a SBA Office of Inspector General 
report.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the report as the best evidence of its contents 
and deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
49. 
Deny. 
50. 
The allegations in this paragraph are legal conclusions which do not require a 
response.  To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that the December 18, 
2025 letter constitutes a final agency action. 
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 
COUNT I- ARBITRATION AND CAPRICIOUS AGENCY ACTION 
51. 
Defendants reallege and incorporate by reference each proceeding response. 
52. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required. 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 7 of 9

- 8 - 
53. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
54. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
55. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
56. 
This paragraph is Plaintiff’s characterization of a December 18, 2025 letter from 
SBA.  Defendants respectfully refer the Court to the letter as the best evidence of its contents and 
deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 
57. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
58. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
59. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
COUNT II- UNLAWFUL WITHHOLDING OF AGENCY ACTION 
60. 
Defendants reallege and incorporate by reference each proceeding response. 
61. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.   
62. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
63. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 8 of 9

- 9 - 
64. 
This paragraph consists of legal conclusions, which require no response is required.  
To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph. 
PRAYER FOR RELIEF 
The remaining paragraphs consist of Plaintiff’s request for relief, which require no 
response. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiff is entitled to the 
relief requested or to any relief whatsoever. 
* * * 
In further response to the Complaint, Defendants raise the following defenses. 
Defendants respectfully request and reserve the right to amend, alter, and supplement the 
defenses contained in this Answer as the facts and circumstances giving rise to the Complaint 
become known to Defendants throughout the course of this litigation. 
First Defense 
 
Sovereign immunity bars a portion of Plaintiff’s requested relief.   
Second Defense 
SBA’s decision was the product of reasoned decision making, supported by record evidence, 
and consistent with the law. 
Dated: February 6, 2026 
 
Washington, DC 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
JEANINE FERRIS PIRRO 
United States Attorney 
 
 
 
By: 
/s/ John J. Bardo 
JOHN J. BARDO, D.C. Bar #1655534 
Assistant United States Attorney 
601 D Street, NW 
Washington, DC 20530 
(202) 252-2539 
 
Attorneys for the United States of America 
Case 1:22-cv-00684-ABJ     Document 61     Filed 02/06/26     Page 9 of 9

File and source

File

creation_entertainment__docket-63154365__doc-61__id-467938869__Answer_to_Amended_Complaint.pdf

Size

191,443 bytes

SHA-256

e857a800c9196e9f008e19c1a8147e73620099bb3a4e049961b18da1e4ab5c5a

Our copy

creation_entertainment__docket-63154365__doc-61__id-467938869__Answer_to_Amended_Complaint.pdf

Original

storage.courtlistener.com