Order Directing Mootness Briefing — Vitolo v. Guzman

Summary

An Order filed June 4, 2021 as Document 42 in Antonio Vitolo et al. v. Isabella Casillas Guzman, No. 3:21-cv-00176-TRM-DCP, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville, signed /s/ Travis R. McDonough. It addresses a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (Doc. 39) filed by Plaintiffs including Byron Sackett, Homesteads Management, LLC, Kevin L. Pearson and S & K Soup Co. The Government responds that Plaintiffs' claims are moot, relying on the declaration of John A. Miller (Doc. 41-1), which states that SBA has commenced processing non-priority applications, including Plaintiffs' applications, in a sequential order. The Court orders Plaintiffs to reply on or before June 7, 2021, addressing the mootness arguments and providing any evidence to rebut the Miller declaration.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE 
 
AT KNOXVILLE 
 
ANTONIO VITOLO et al., 
 
Plaintiffs, 
 
v. 
 
ISABELLA CASILLAS GUZMAN 
 
Defendant. 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
Case No. 3:21-cv-176 
 
Judge Travis R. McDonough 
 
Magistrate Judge Debra C. Poplin 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
Before the Court is a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction 
filed by Plaintiffs Byron Sackett, Homesteads Management, LLC, Kevin L. Pearson, S & K 
Soup Co., Alfred Castiglioni, The 579 LLC, Chardonnays Inc., Zinfandel LLC, Denis Flanagan, 
and 3KAD LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”).  (Doc. 39.)  The Government has responded to 
Plaintiffs’ motion, arguing that a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are not 
warranted because Plaintiffs’ claims are moot.  (See Doc. 41.) 
In support of their response, the Government submitted the declaration of John A. Miller, 
Deputy Associate Administrator of Capital Access at the Small Business Association  (“SBA”).  
(Doc. 41-1.)  In his declaration, Miller declared under the penalty of perjury that: 
 SBA has already commenced processing non-priority applications, including the 
Plaintiffs’ applications, in a sequential order based on its ordinary review 
practices.  (Id. at 3.)   
 SBA is not currently processing any priority applications. It will only resume 
processing for priority applications once it completes processing for all previously 
filed non-priority applications, and only then if the Restaurant Revitalization Fund 
is not first exhausted.  (Id. at 3–4.) 
Case 3:21-cv-00176-TRM-DCP   Document 42   Filed 06/04/21   Page 1 of 2   PageID #: 349

 
2 
 SBA has already initiated processing and consideration for all of Plaintiffs’ 
applications.  (Id. at 4–5.) 
 
In light of the Miller declaration, Plaintiffs are ORDERED to reply to the Government’s 
response on or before June 7, 2021, specifically addressing the Government’s mootness 
arguments and providing any evidence Plaintiffs may have to rebut the Miller declaration. 
SO ORDERED.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Travis R. McDonough 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TRAVIS R. MCDONOUGH 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 
Case 3:21-cv-00176-TRM-DCP   Document 42   Filed 06/04/21   Page 2 of 2   PageID #: 350

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.tned.99748.42.0.pdf

Size

149,256 bytes

SHA-256

7fbc3f2ebbd6ebd4338b7dad19b18456336ce961dd921f6b9a7cfd6fc4425665

Our copy

gov.uscourts.tned.99748.42.0.pdf

Original

No public link identified.