Unopposed Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation — U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Biden, No. 4:21-cv-01236-O

Summary

Plaintiffs in Case No. 4:21-cv-01236-O, referred to as “the SEALs,” move for leave to file a reply brief of 16 pages in support of their motion for preliminary injunction, exceeding the page limitation set by Local Rule 7.2(c). The motion says the case involves the Free Exercise Clause, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act, and concerns policies related to the military vaccination mandate. It says the Court previously granted the SEALs a six-page extension for their opening brief and granted Defendants an extension for their opposition, and that Defendants do not oppose a reply brief of 16 pages. The signature block shows /s/ Heather Gebelin Hacker, dated the 17th day of December, 2021.

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

  Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 54 Filed 12/17/21                  Page 1 of 5 PageID 2239



                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
                                FORT WORTH DIVISION

 U.S. NAVY SEALs 1-26, et al.,

                        Plaintiffs,
                                                             Case No. 4:21-cv-01236-O
          v.

 JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., et al.,

                        Defendants.


         UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION

         Plaintiffs U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26, U.S. Navy Special Warfare Combatant Craft Crewmen

1-5, U.S. Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician 1, and U.S. Navy Divers 1-3 (“the

SEALs”), by and through counsel, respectfully move this Court to allows them to file a reply brief

in support of their motion for preliminary injunction exceeding the page limitation set by Local

Rule 7.2(c). In support of this Motion, the SEALs respectfully state:

         1.    Pursuant to Local Rule 7.2(c): “A reply brief must not exceed 10 pages. . . .

Permission to file a brief in excess of these page limitations will be granted by the presiding judge

only for extraordinary and compelling reasons.” The SEALs believe that compelling reasons exist

to grant them leave to file a reply brief in support of their motion for preliminary injunction of 16

pages.

         2.    This case presents several compelling matters of public importance because it

involves application of the Free Exercise Clause of the United States, U.S. Const. amend. I, the

Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq., the Administrative Procedure Act,

5 U.S.C. §§ 701-06, Department of Defense regulations, and Department of the Navy regulations.

See Compl. at ¶ 2.
  Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 54 Filed 12/17/21                  Page 2 of 5 PageID 2240



          3.    Specifically, the SEALs seek a preliminary injunction protecting their religious

liberty against the government’s policies and actions related to the military COVID-19 vaccination

mandate. Id. at ¶¶ 22-25. The SEALs sincerely held religious beliefs forbid each of them from

receiving the COVID-19 vaccine for a variety of reasons based upon their Christian faith as

revealed through the Holy Bible and prayerful discernment. Mot. Prelim. Inj. App. 870-1022, ECF

No. 17.

          4.    The Court previously granted the SEALs a six-page extension for their brief in

support of the motion for preliminary injunction. ECF No. 25. The Court also granted the

Defendants a 15-page extension for their opposition brief to the motion for preliminary injunction.

Id.

          5.    The SEALs’ reply brief addresses not only the merits of their preliminary injunction

request, but also the several jurisdictional arguments raised by Defendants, as well as rebuttal

evidence from the 35 plaintiffs.

          6.    The SEALs have made a good faith effort to comply with the page limitation, but

the complexity of the issues and the argument of the Defendants requires additional pages so that

the Court has a complete factual and legal analysis. Thus, the SEALs respectfully submit that 16

number of pages is necessary to provide this Court with a proper reply brief.

          7.    Defendants do not oppose a reply brief of 16 pages.

          WHEREFORE, the SEALs respectfully request that the Court grant this Unopposed

Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limitations and allow them to file a reply brief of 16 pages.




                                                 2
  Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 54 Filed 12/17/21                      Page 3 of 5 PageID 2241



Respectfully submitted this 17th day of December, 2021.

 KELLY J. SHACKELFORD                                  /s/ Heather Gebelin Hacker
   Texas Bar No. 18070950                              HEATHER GEBELIN HACKER
 JEFFREY C. MATEER                                       Texas Bar No. 24103325
   Texas Bar No. 13185320                              ANDREW B. STEPHENS
 HIRAM S. SASSER, III                                    Texas Bar No. 24079396
   Texas Bar No. 24039157                              HACKER STEPHENS LLP
 DAVID J. HACKER                                       108 Wild Basin Road South, Suite 250
   Texas Bar No. 24103323                              Austin, Texas 78746
 MICHAEL D. BERRY                                      Tel.: (512) 399-3022
   Texas Bar No. 24085835                              heather@hackerstephens.com
 JUSTIN BUTTERFIELD                                    andrew@hackerstephens.com
   Texas Bar No. 24062642
 ROGER BYRON                                           Attorneys for Plaintiffs
   Texas Bar No. 24062643
 FIRST LIBERTY INSTITUTE
 2001 W. Plano Pkwy., Ste. 1600
 Plano, Texas 75075
 Tel: (972) 941-4444
 jmateer@firstliberty.org
 hsasser@firstliberty.org
 dhacker@firstliberty.org
 mberry@firstliberty.org
 jbutterfield@firstliberty.org
 rbyron@firstliberty.org

 JORDAN E. PRATT
   Florida Bar No. 100958* **
 FIRST LIBERTY INSTITUTE
 227 Pennsylvania Ave., SE
 Washington, DC 20003
 Tel: (972) 941-4444
 jpratt@firstliberty.org

 *Application for admission pro hac vice
 pending
 ** Not yet admitted to the D.C. Bar, but
 admitted to practice law in Florida. Practicing
 law in D.C. pursuant to D.C. Court of
 Appeals Rule 49(c)(8) under the supervision
 of an attorney admitted to the D.C. Bar.




                                                   3
  Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 54 Filed 12/17/21                  Page 4 of 5 PageID 2242



                             CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

        On December 17, 2021, I emailed Defendants’ counsel for their position on this motion.

Defendants’ counsel stated that they do not oppose Plaintiffs’ request for six extra pages for the

reply brief.


                                              /s/Heather Gebelin Hacker
                                              HEATHER GEBELIN HACKER




                                                 4
  Case 4:21-cv-01236-O Document 54 Filed 12/17/21               Page 5 of 5 PageID 2243



                               CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

       I hereby certify that on December 17, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing document

through the Court’s ECF system, which automatically notifies counsel of record for each party.


                                            /s/Heather Gebelin Hacker
                                            HEATHER GEBELIN HACKER




                                               5


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.54.0.pdf

Size

137,262 bytes

SHA-256

2da1b367ede9bd1e11ec9aa27c967160f3befa3df9b031cc67507fa2ff841367

Our copy

gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.54.0.pdf

Original

archive.org