Complaint - Feds. for Med. Freedom v. Biden, — F. Supp. 3d. — , 2022 WL 188329, (2021-08-24)

Summary

Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion for Class-Wide Preliminary Injunction, dated March 31, 2022 and filed as Document 65 in Air Force Officer, on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lloyd J. Austin, III, Frank Kendall, III, and Robert I. Miller, Case No. 5:22-cv-00009-TES, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, Macon Division, with a /s/ signature for Adam S. Hochschild. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, Plaintiffs ask the Court to enjoin Defendants from enforcing the Department of Defense's August 24, 2021 Order and the Department of Air Force's September 3, 2021 COVID-19 vaccine mandates against Air Force NCO, Air Force Special Agent, Air Force Engineer or any member of the Class. They also ask to enjoin adverse action based on the lawsuit or on a request for religious accommodation.

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

Full text

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION

AIR FORCE OFFICER, on behalf of herself
)
and all others similarly situated,
)

)
Case No. 5:22-cv-00009-TES

Plaintiff,
)
v.

)

)
LLOYD J. AUSTIN, III, in his
)
official capacity as Secretary of Defense;
)
FRANK KENDALL, III, in his
)
official capacity as Secretary of the Air Force; and  )
ROBERT I. MILLER, in his
)
official capacity as Surgeon General of the
)
Air Force,

)

)

Defendants.
)

PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR CLASS-WIDE PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION

Pursuant to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 65, Plaintiff Air Force Officer, joined by
Additional Representatives1 Air Force NCO, Air Force Special Agent, and Air Force Engineer
(collectively, “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated (collectively,
the “Class”), respectfully request that this Court enter a class-wide preliminary injunction
enjoining Defendants from enforcing certain COVID-19 vaccine mandates—specifically,
Department of Defense’s August 24, 2021 Order and Department of Air Force’s September 3,
2021 Order (collectively, the “Mandates”)2—against Air Force NCO, Air Force Special Agent,

1 See Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint, to Add Three Plaintiff Class
Representatives, and/or for Intervention, filed concurrently herewith.
2 Plaintiff Air Force Officer, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, also seeks
relief as to certain federal civilian employee COVID-19 vaccine mandates—specifically,
President Biden’s September 9, 2021 Executive Order 14043, Department of Defense’s October
1, 2021 Order, and Department of Air Force’s October 8, 2021 Order.  See Second Amended
Class Action Complaint.  However, those mandates are preliminarily enjoined pursuant to
Case 5:22-cv-00009-TES   Document 65   Filed 03/31/22   Page 1 of 4

2

Air Force Engineer or any member of the Class,3 and enjoining Defendants from taking any
adverse action against Air Force NCO, Air Force Special Agent, and Air Force Engineer or any
member of the Class on the basis of this lawsuit or of any member’s request for religious
accommodation related to the Mandates.4
Plaintiffs rely on and incorporate the Memorandum of Law in Support of this motion and
declarations of Air Force NCO, Air Force Special Agent, and Air Force Engineer and exhibits
thereto, filed simultaneously herewith.  In addition, Plaintiffs rely on and incorporate Air Force
Officer’s briefing and the declarations in support of her original Motion for Preliminary
Injunction and exhibits thereto [including Doc. 2, 2-1 to 2-17, 40, 40-1, 40-2, 41, 41-1, and 45],
the Second Amended Class Action Complaint, filed simultaneously herewith, and Air Force
Officer’s briefing and the declarations in support of her original Motion for Class Certification
[including Doc. 57, 57-1, 57-2, 57-3, and 57-4].
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court enter a preliminary injunction that
enjoins Defendants from (1) enforcing the Mandates against Air Force NCO, Air Force Special
Agent, and Air Force Engineer or any member of the Class, and (2) taking any adverse action
against Air Force NCO, Air Force Special Agent, and Air Force Engineer or any member of the

another court’s order, Feds. for Med. Freedom v. Biden, --- F. Supp. 3d. ----, 2022 WL 188329,
at *8 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 21, 2022).  See February 15 Injunction Order [Doc. 51], p. 2 n.2. Therefore
the present motion does not seek relief as to those federal civilian employee mandates.  Plaintiff
Air Force Officer reserves the right to pursue such relief in the future if and as appropriate.
3 The Court has already granted a preliminary injunction in favor of Plaintiff Air Force Officer
individually.  [Doc. 51].
4 Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, also seek relief as to
Defendants’ violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.  See Second Amended Class Action
Complaint, Count III.  The present motion does not seek relief as to this claim.  Plaintiffs reserve
the right to pursue such relief in the future if and as appropriate.
Case 5:22-cv-00009-TES   Document 65   Filed 03/31/22   Page 2 of 4

3

Class on the basis of this lawsuit or of Plaintiff’s or any member’s request for religious
accommodation related to the Mandates.

Case 5:22-cv-00009-TES   Document 65   Filed 03/31/22   Page 3 of 4

4

Dated: March 31, 2022

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Adam S. Hochschild

Stephen Crampton, pro hac vice
Michael R. Hirsh, GA #357220
THOMAS MORE SOCIETY – Senior Counsel

Hirsh Law Office, LLC
PO Box 4506

2295 Towne Lake Parkway

Tupelo, MS 38803

Suite 116-181
(662)255-9439

Woodstock, GA 30189
scrampton@thomasmoresociety.org

(678)653-9907
michael@hirsh.law
Adam S. Hochschild, pro hac vice
Hochschild Law Firm
THOMAS MORE SOCIETY – Special Counsel
PO Box 401
Plainfield, VT 05667
(314)503-0326
adam@hochschildlaw.com

Mary Catherine Hodes, pro hac vice
THOMAS MORE SOCIETY – Special Counsel
112 S. Hanley Rd., Second Floor
Clayton, MO 63105
(314)825-5725
mchodes@thomasmoresociety.org

Michael McHale, pro hac vice
THOMAS MORE SOCIETY – Counsel
10506 Burt Circle, Ste. 110
Omaha, NE 68114
(402)501-8586
mmchale@thomasmoresociety.org

Paul M. Jonna, pro hac vice
LiMandri & Jonna LLP
THOMAS MORE SOCIETY – Special Counsel
P.O. Box 9120
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
(858)759-994
pjonna@limandri.com

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Case 5:22-cv-00009-TES   Document 65   Filed 03/31/22   Page 4 of 4

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.gamd.123364.65.0.pdf

Size

474,070 bytes

SHA-256

474e32eace5cd21e97febc4850525a930aa0153c32879ad87494b86c5393a885

Our copy

gov.uscourts.gamd.123364.65.0.pdf

Original

archive.org