Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 1 Filed 07/29/13 Page 1 of 2

FILED

21113 JUL 29 PM t1: 07

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

;tu

ti

iESTEkN

occ
DSTRCT OF

TEXAS

AUSTIN DWISION

V

Christopher Daniel MeNosky Plaintiff

Sven Stricker Plaintiff
The State of Texas
Defendant

A13cV0631 CASE NUMBER:

ss

COMPLAINT

(1) Christopher Daniel McNosky 5108 Pleasant Run, Colleyville, TX 76034
Sven Stricker 3047 Bent Tree Ct. Bedford, TX 76021

(2) The State of Texas
112 E 11th St Austin, TX 78701
(3) United States judicial precedent, citing Exparte Young 209 US. 123 (1908), clearly indicates that when there is a question regarding whether or not a state's law is in violation of federal law, suits may be brought before United States District Courts to enjoin state officials from enforcing unconstitutional laws. The plaintiffs claim that the defendant's enforcement ofArticle 1, Sec. 32 ofthe Texas Constitution, and Texas Family Code; Title 1; Subtitle A; Chapter 2; Subchapter A; Section 2.001(b), is in violation of The Equal Protection Clause of The Fourteenth Amendment of The United States Constitution, due to their explicit incorporation of sex-based discrimination practices, utilized when evaluating the validity of Texas Marriage license applications.
(4) On July 1, 2013, plaintiffs Christopher Daniel McNosky and Sven Stricker, jointly
applied for a marriage license at the Vital Records Office of Tarrant County, located in

Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 1 Filed 07/29/13 Page 2 of 2
Fort Worth, Texas. The plaintiffs properly completed marriage license application was denied immediately upon submission, without further review. The plaintiffs were explicitly informed that their application could not be reviewed, nor approved because
they were both of the same sex.
(5) According to United States Supreme Court precedent set by Craig v. Boren; Glenn v.
Brumby; J.E.B. v. Alabama, and Mississippi Universityfor Women v. Hogan, and United
States v. Virginia, sex is considered to be a quasi-suspect classification, subject to
intermediate judicial scrutiny under The Equal Protection Clause of The Fourteenth Amendment of The United States Constitution. According to the majority opinions of the
preceding cases, federal, state, and local governments are barred from engaging in the
discriminatory allocation and denial of liberty on the basis of sex, without valid
governmental objective.
(6) The defendant's subsequent practice of sex-based discrimination, related to the enforcement of Article 1, Sec. 32 ofthe Texas Constitution, which reads, "(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. (b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage," and Texas Family Code; Title 1; Subtitle A; Chapter 2; SubchapterA; Section 2.001 (b), which reads, "A license may not be issued for the marriage of persons of the same sex," is not rooted in any sort of valid govenunental objective, and is thus a violation of The Equal Protection Clause of The Fourteenth Amendment of The United States Constitution, since the aforementioned laws
restrict the otherwise legally eligible plaintiffs from participating in the state-regulated
institution of marriage, solely based upon their respective sexes. These laws further infer that the plaintiffs could be granted a marriage license simply if one of them was
biologically female.
The plaintiffs are seeking relief in the form of a federal injunction, preventing The State of Texas from enforcing both Article 1, Sec. 32 ofthe Texas Constitution, and Texas Family Code; Title 1; Subtitle A; Chapter 2; Subchapter A; Section 2.001 (b), so that they would then be allowed to procure a marriage license issued by The State of Texas.
Christopher Daniel MeNosky 5108 Pleasant Run Colleyville, TX 76034 817-360-0687
ci:'
Sven Stricker 3047 Bent Tree Ct. Bedford, TX 76021 817-681-1760

 
 Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 10 Filed 10/09/13 Page 1 of 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Christopher Daniel McNosky
5108 Pleasant Run, Colleyville, TX 76034
Sven Stricker
3047 Bent Tree Ct. Bedford, TX 76021
Plaintiffs
vs.
Texas Governor Rick Perry Office of the Governor
State Insurance Building 1100 San Jacinto Austin, TX 78701

CASE NUMBER: A-13-CV-0631

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott Office of the Governor State Insurance Building
1100 San Jacinto
Austin, Texas 78701

Tarrant County Clerk Mary Louise Garcia Office of Public Records and Civil Courts
1895 Courthouse 100 W. Weatherford Fort Worth, TX 76196
Defendants

Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 10 Filed 10/09/13 Page 2 of 6
II. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. This civil rights case challenges as unconstitutional the Texas statute and state
constitutional amendment that each prohibit the issuance of marriage licenses to samesex couples in Texas. The issuance of marriage licenses exclusively to opposite-sex couples and blanketed rejection of same-sex marriage license applicants, violates rights
secured to the plaintiffs by the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief for themselves and hope to set a precedent that will lead to relief for other same-sex couples.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. Jurisdiction over the federal claims is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.0 §1331 and §1343(3) and (4). Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391. United States
judicial precedent, citing Ex pane Young 209 U.s. 123 (1908), The Eleventh
Amendment of The United States Constitution clearly indicates that when there is a question regarding whether or not a state's law is in violation of federal law, suits may be brought before United States District Courts to enjoin state officials from enforcing unconstitutional laws. The plaintiffs claim that the defendants' enforcement of Article 1, Sec. 32 of the Texas Constitution, and Texas Faniily Code; Title 1; Subtitle A; Chapter 2; Subchapter A; Section 2.001 (b), is in violation of The Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of The Fourteenth Amendment of The United States Constitution.
III. PARTIES
3. Plaintiff Christopher Daniel McNosky is a resident of Colleyville, Texas. 4. Plaintiff Sven Stricker is a resident of Bedford, Texas. 5. Defendant Rick Perry is the Governor of the State of Texas. In that capacity,

Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 10 Filed 10/09/13 Page 3 of 6
his duties include ensuring that the laws of the State are faithfully executed. See Texas
Const. Art. IV, § 10. Defendant Perry is sued in his official capacity. 6. Defendant Greg Abbott is the Attorney General of the State of Texas. In that
capacity, he is both chief legal officer and chief law enforcement official for the State of
Texas. Among his duties is the requirement that he advise state and local officials on
questions of Texas law. See Texas Const. Art. IV, § 22. Defendant Abbott is sued in his
official capacity. 7. Defendant Mary Louise Garcia, Tarrant County Clerk, is responsible for
issuing marriage licenses and ensuring the personal information on the marriage license is accurate. Defendant Garcia is sued in her official capacity.
IV. FACTS
8. On July 1, 2013, plaintiffs Christopher Daniel McNosky and Sven Stricker, jointly applied for a marriage license at the Vital Records Office of Tarrant County, located in Fort Worth, Texas. The plaintiffs' properly completed marriage license application was denied immediately upon submission, without further review. The plaintiffs were explicitly informed that their application could not be reviewed, nor
approved because they were both of the same sex. An approval of their marriage license would have been a direct violation of state constitution and statute. Upon rejection at the
Vital Records Office, plaintiffs were referred to the Tarrant County Public Records
division of the Tarrant County Clerk's Office for further review of their completed
marriage license application. The Public Records division then referred plaintiffs to the
Civil Division of the Tarrant County Court at Law Clerks Office, where they were then referred to the Dell Dehay Law Library of Tarrant County for further assistance, which
never materialized. 9. Citing United States Supreme Court precedent set by Craig v. Boren; Glenn v.

Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 10 Filed 10/09/13 Page 4 of 6
Brumby; J.E.B. v. Alabama; and Mississ4pi University for Women v. Hogan, and United
States v. Virginia, sex is considered to be a quasi-suspect classification, subject to intermediate judicial scrutiny under The Equal Protection Clause and The Due Process Clause of The Fourteenth Amendment of The United States Constitution.
10. According to the majority opinions of the preceding cases, federal, state, and local governments are barred from engaging in the discriminatory allocation and denial of liberty on the basis of sex, without valid governmental objective.
11. The defendants' continue to practice sex-based discrimination, related to their
respective roles in the enforcement of Article 1, Sec. 32 of the Texas Constitution, which
read:
"(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. (b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or
recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage,"
and Texas Family Code; Title 1; Subtitle A; Chapter 2; Subchapter A; Section 2.001 (b):
"A license may not be issued for the marriage of persons of the same sex."
This different treatment of same-sex couples from opposite-sex couples is not supported by a legitimate state interest and imposes harm, by denying unencumbered exercise of a fundamental right, on same-sex couples including Plaintiffs Chris and Sven. See: Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 205, 211(1888); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399
(1923); Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942); Loving v.
Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967); Cleveland Board ofEducation v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632,
639-40 (1974); Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977); Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978); Turner v. Sqfley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987);

Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 10 Filed 10/09/13 Page 5 of 6
ML.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116(1996); Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 574 (2003).
12. The aforementioned laws restrict the otherwise legally eligible plaintiffs from
participating in the state-regulated institution of marriage, solely based upon their
respective sexes. These laws further suggest that the plaintiffs could be granted a
marriage license simply if one of them was biologically female. Thus, this sex-based discrimination is a violation of The Equal Protection Clause and The Due Process Clause of The Fourteenth Amendment of The United States Constitution.
V. NEED FOR INJUNCTION
13. More than 1,000 federal benefits, privileges and responsibilities are impacted by marital status. Texas same-sex couples including Chris and Sven will be denied all of those federal benefits solely because of their respective genders. Many state and private employer benefits will also be denied to same-sex couples residing and/or working in Texas.
14. Defendant Garcia is responsible for issuing all marriage licenses in Tarrant County. She supplies forms and instructions for filling out forms. Texas law demands that she require that each marriage license application, when presented for approval, be completed in accordance with Texas law.
15. Because of Texas's Const. Article 1, Sec. 32 of the Texas Constitution, and Texas Family Code; Title 1; Subtitle A; Chapter 2; Subchapter A; Section 2.001 (b) prohibitions on same sex marriage, Defendant Garcia requires persons applying for a marriage license be of the opposite sex in order to be approved.
16. Upon information and belief Defendant Garcia will not allow plaintiffs' marriage license application to be approved.
17. The public interest is clearly served by this court acting to order non-
discriminatory recognition of Texas same-sex marriage applicants in a manner which

Case 1:13-cv-00631-SS Document 10 Filed 10/09/13 Page 6 of 6 Texas treats similarly situated opposite-sex couples. Only prompt action by this federal court ordering declaratory and injunctive relief will serve the public interest.
VI. CLAIM FOR RELIEF
42 First Claim U.S.C. §1983 - United States Constitution
18. Defendants, acting under color of law, have violated rights secured to the
plaintiffs by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution
including the right of association, the right to due process of law, and the right to equal
protection under the law.
VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Court: A. Issue a declaratory judgment that the statute and Texas Constitutional
provision at issue in this case, as applied to the plaintiffs, violate the
constitutional and statutory rights of plaintiffs;
B. Issue a preliminary and permanent injunction against the Defendants and
all those acting in concert prohibiting enforcement of the laws, as applied,
at issue in this action.
Respectfully submitted,
Christ he aniel McNosky 5108 Pleasant Run Colleyville, TX 76034 817-360-0687
Sven Stricker 3047 Bent Tree Ct. Bedford, TX 76021 817-681-1760

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 1 of 7
CLOSED,STAYED
U.S. District Court [LIVE] Western District of Texas (Austin) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:13−cv−00631−SS

McNosky et al v. Perry et al Assigned to: Judge Sam Sparks Cause: 28:1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff Christopher Daniel McNosky
Plaintiff Sven Stricker

Date Filed: 07/29/2013 Date Terminated: 08/21/2015 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by Christopher Daniel McNosky 5108 Pleasant Run Colleyville, TX 76034 817−360−0687 Email: cmcnosky@gmail.com PRO SE
represented by Sven Stricker 3047 Bent Tree Ct. Bedford, TX 76021 817−681−1760 Email: ststravis@gmail.com PRO SE

V. Defendant The State of Texas TERMINATED: 08/19/2013
Defendant Texas Governor Rick Perry
Defendant

represented by William T. Deane Office of the Attorney General General Litigation Division−019 P.O. Box 12548 Austin, TX 78711−2548 (512) 463−2120 Fax: 512/320−0667 Email: Bill.Deane@oag.texas.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael P. Murphy Texas Attorney General Office of the Solicitor General 209 W. 14th Street, 7th Floor P. O. Box 12548, Austin, TX 78711−2548 Austin, TX 78701 512−936−2995 Fax: 512−474−2697 Email: michaelp.murphy@texasattorneygeneral.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
William T. Deane (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 2 of 7

Greg Abbott Texas Attorney General

represented by Michael P. Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William T. Deane (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Mary Louise Garcia Tarrant County Clerk

represented by Russell A. Friemel Self 6625 Andress Drive Fort Worth, TX 76132 (817) 798−2652 Email: rfriemel@justice.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Movant Cleopatra DeLeon

represented by Barry A. Chasnoff Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP 300 Convent Street, Suite 1600 San Antonio, TX 78205 (210) 281−7001 Fax: 210/224−2035 Email: bchasnoff@akingump.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel McNeel Lane , Jr. Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP 300 Convent Street Suite 2100 San Antonio, TX 78205 210−270−7170 Fax: 210−270−7205 Email: neel.lane@nortonrosefulbright.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Frank Stenger−Castro Attorney at Law 208 Sir Arthur Court San Antonio, TX 78213 (210) 241−0234 Email: fstengerc@yahoo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Movant Nicole Dimetman

represented by Barry A. Chasnoff (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel McNeel Lane , Jr. (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Frank Stenger−Castro (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 3 of 7

Movant Victor Holmes
Movant Mark Phariss

represented by Barry A. Chasnoff (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Daniel McNeel Lane , Jr. (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Frank Stenger−Castro (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Barry A. Chasnoff (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Daniel McNeel Lane , Jr. (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Frank Stenger−Castro (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/29/2013
07/29/2013 08/19/2013 08/19/2013 09/11/2013 09/16/2013 09/16/2013 10/03/2013
10/09/2013
10/09/2013
10/15/2013

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 100018262), filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet and Receipt)(os) (Entered: 07/30/2013)
2 Summons Issued as to The State of Texas. (os) (Entered: 07/30/2013)
3 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Rick Perry amending 1 Complaint, filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker.(kkc) (Entered: 08/19/2013)
4 Summons Issued as to Rick Perry. (kkc) (Entered: 08/19/2013)
5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. Rick Perry served on 8/23/2013, answer due 9/13/2013. (kkc) (Entered: 09/12/2013)
6 MOTION to Dismiss by Rick Perry. (Deane, William) (Entered: 09/16/2013)
7 ANSWER to 3 Amended Complaint by Rick Perry.(Deane, William) (Entered: 09/16/2013)
8 MOTION to Amend Complaint by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Second Amended Complaint, # 2 Summons, # 3 Envelope) (kkc) (Entered: 10/03/2013)
9 ORDER GRANTING 8 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint; DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 6 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 10/09/2013)
10 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against Rick Perry, Greg Abbott, Mary Louise Garcia amending 3 Amended Complaint, filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker.(kkc) (Entered: 10/09/2013)
11 Summons Issued as to Greg Abbott, Mary Louise Garcia, Rick Perry. (kkc) (Entered: 10/15/2013)

Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 4 of 7

10/17/2013 10/23/2013 10/31/2013 10/31/2013 11/06/2013 11/12/2013 11/14/2013 11/15/2013
11/19/2013 11/20/2013 11/20/2013 11/21/2013
11/23/2013 11/23/2013
11/25/2013 11/26/2013
11/27/2013

12 MOTION for Permission for Electronic Case Filing by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (kkc) (Entered: 10/17/2013)
13 ANSWER to 10 Amended Complaint by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry.(Deane, William) (Entered: 10/23/2013)
14 ORDER GRANTING 12 Motion for Electronic Filing. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 10/31/2013)
15 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker 12 MOTION for Permission for Electronic Case Filing. (kkc) (Entered: 10/31/2013)
16 Order for Proposed Scheduling Order. Proposed Scheduling Order due by 12/23/2013. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 11/06/2013)
17 Opposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Proposed Order)(Deane, William) (Entered: 11/12/2013)
18 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction , MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 11/14/2013)
19 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 17 Opposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Conference, # 2 Certificate of Service, # 3 Proposed Order)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 11/15/2013)
20 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker, re 17 Opposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by Defendant Rick Perry, Defendant Greg Abbott (McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 11/19/2013)
21 MOTION to Intervene by Cleopatra DeLeon, Nicole Dimetman, Victor Holmes, Mark Phariss. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Proposed Order) (kkc) (Entered: 11/20/2013)
22 ORDER GRANTING 19 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Consolidate; Response due by 11/26/2013. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 11/20/2013)
23 RESPONSE to Motion, filed by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry, re 18 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Plaintiff Christopher Daniel McNosky, Plaintiff Sven Stricker (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Deane, William) (Entered: 11/21/2013)
24 Amended MOTION for Preliminary Injunction , Amended MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Affidavit)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 11/23/2013)
25 ATTACHMENT Proposed Order to 24 Amended MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Amended MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (McNosky, Christopher) Modified docket text on 11/25/2013 (kkc). (Entered: 11/23/2013)
26 REPLY to Response to Motion, filed by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry, re 17 Opposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by Defendant Rick Perry, Defendant Greg Abbott (Deane, William) (Entered: 11/25/2013)
27 Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 24 Amended MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Amended MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Deane, William) (Entered: 11/26/2013)
28 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker, re 27 Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 24 Amended MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Amended MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Defendant Rick Perry, Defendant Greg Abbott (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 11/27/2013)

Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 5 of 7

12/02/2013
12/04/2013
12/09/2013 12/10/2013 12/11/2013 12/17/2013 12/18/2013 12/23/2013
12/23/2013 12/23/2013 12/23/2013
12/23/2013 12/23/2013 12/30/2013 01/06/2014 01/06/2014 01/07/2014 01/08/2014 01/09/2014

29 ORDER GRANTING 27 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response and Objections to Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction; Response/Objections due by 12/27/2013. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 12/02/2013)
30 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker re: 10 Amended Complaint. Mary Louise Garcia served on 11/19/2013, answer due 12/10/2013. (McNosky, Christopher) Modified docket text on 12/4/2013 (kkc). (Entered: 12/04/2013)
31 Scheduling Recommendations −Joint Discovery Plan by Greg Abbott, Christopher Daniel McNosky, Rick Perry, Sven Stricker. (Deane, William) (Entered: 12/09/2013)
32 MOTION to Dismiss /Brief AND Resp to Amended TRO & Injunction by Mary Louise Garcia. (Friemel, Russell) (Entered: 12/10/2013)
33 ORDER (All Pending Matters set for 1/9/2014 at 2:00 PM before Judge Sam Sparks). Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
34 RESPONSE to 31 Scheduling Recommendations/Proposed Scheduling Order by Mary Louise Garcia. (Friemel, Russell) (Entered: 12/17/2013)
35 Proposed Scheduling Order −Joint by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Deane, William) (Entered: 12/18/2013)
36 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael P. Murphy on behalf of Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. Attorney Michael P. Murphy added to party Greg Abbott(pty:dft), Attorney Michael P. Murphy added to party Rick Perry(pty:dft) (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Certificate of Service)(Murphy, Michael) (Entered: 12/23/2013)
37 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Christopher Daniel McNosky, Sven Stricker. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Affidavit)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 12/23/2013)
38 NON−CONSENT to Trial by US Magistrate Judge by Mary Louise Garcia (Friemel, Russell) Modified docket text on 12/23/2013 (kkc). (Entered: 12/23/2013)
39 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry, re 24 Amended MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Amended MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Plaintiff Christopher Daniel McNosky, Plaintiff Sven Stricker (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Exhibit1, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Murphy, Michael) (Entered: 12/23/2013)
40 NON−CONSENT to Trial by US Magistrate Judge by Christopher Daniel McNosky. (McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 12/23/2013)
41 NON−CONSENT to Trial by US Magistrate Judge by Sven Stricker. (McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 12/23/2013)
42 Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 37 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix A, # 2 Proposed Order)(Deane, William) (Entered: 12/30/2013)
43 Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 37 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Mary Louise Garcia. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Friemel, Russell) (Entered: 01/06/2014)
44 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM to 32 MOTION to Dismiss /Brief AND Resp to Amended TRO & Injunction by Mary Louise Garcia. (Friemel, Russell) (Entered: 01/06/2014)
45 NON−CONSENT to Trial by US Magistrate Judge by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Deane, William) (Entered: 01/07/2014)
46 ADVISORY TO THE COURT by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Order in pending case)(Murphy, Michael) (Entered: 01/08/2014)
47 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Sam Sparks: Hearing held on All Pending Matters on 1/9/2014 (Minute entry documents are not available electronically.). (Court Reporter Lily Reznik.)(td) (Entered: 01/10/2014)

Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 6 of 7

01/10/2014
01/12/2014 01/23/2014
01/28/2014 01/28/2014 02/03/2014 03/12/2014 03/22/2014 09/10/2014 06/29/2015 07/16/2015 07/22/2015 07/22/2015

49 ORDER DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 17 Motion to Consolidate; GRANTING 21 Motion to Intervene, for the limited purpose of opposing the Motion to Consolidate, but these plaintiffs are not parties to the McNosky case at this time; GRANTING 42 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment; GRANTING 43 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment; Responses due 20 days from entry of this order. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 01/13/2014)
48 Amended MOTION for Summary Judgment by Christopher Daniel McNosky. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Affidavit)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 01/12/2014)
50 Transcript filed of Proceedings held on January 9, 2014, Proceedings Transcribed: All Pending Matters. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Lily I. Reznik, Telephone number: 512−391−8792. Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript to ensure compliance with the FRCP 5.2(a)/FRCrP 49.1(a). A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Notice of Redaction Request must be filed within 21 days. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed Redaction Request due 2/13/2014, Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 2/24/2014, Release of Transcript Restriction set for 4/23/2014, (Reznik, Lily) (Entered: 01/23/2014)
51 ADVISORY TO THE COURT by Greg Abbott, Mary Louise Garcia, Rick Perry. (Murphy, Michael) Modified on 1/28/2014 to remove filers (kkc). (Entered: 01/28/2014)
52 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by Greg Abbott, Mary Louise Garcia, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Murphy, Michael) (Entered: 01/28/2014)
53 ORDER GRANTING 52 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment; this case will be on the same schedule as established by agreement in cause no. 13cv631 and 13cv955. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 02/03/2014)
54 MOTION to Stay Case by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Stay Proceedings)(Murphy, Michael) (Entered: 03/12/2014)
55 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky, re 54 MOTION to Stay Case filed by Defendant Rick Perry, Defendant Greg Abbott (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Proposed Order)(McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 03/22/2014)
56 ORDER GRANTING 54 Motion to Stay Proceedings; all pending motions ( 18 , 24 , 32 , 37 , 48 ) are DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling after the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit renders its opinion in the related case. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (kkc) (Entered: 09/10/2014)
57 ADVISORY TO THE COURT by Mary Louise Garcia. (Friemel, Russell) (Entered: 06/29/2015)
58 ORDER that within fifteen (15) days of this date any party herein must file a pleading to show cause why this case should remain open and specify any factual or legal issue surviving in this cause. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (klw) (Entered: 07/16/2015)
59 RESPONSE to 58 Order to Show Cause by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry, The State of Texas. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Deane, William) Modified on 7/22/2015 to create link and add text (klw). (Entered: 07/22/2015)
60 DEFICIENCY NOTICE to William T. Deane: re 59 Response to Order to Show Cause. Pursuant to the Administrative Policies and Procedures Section 3g, with the exception of multiple motion types,...each filing must consist of only one pleading. Multiple pleadings...must be filed as separate documents. Your document contains a RESPONSE and a MOTION. Your RESPONSE has been filed. Please re−file you MOTION separately. (klw) (Entered: 07/22/2015)

Case: 1:13-cv-631 As of: 10/31/2017 10:33 AM CDT 7 of 7

07/23/2015 07/30/2015 08/10/2015 08/19/2015 08/20/2015
08/21/2015

61 MOTION to Dismiss as Moot by Greg Abbott, Rick Perry. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Deane, William) (Entered: 07/23/2015)
62 RESPONSE to Show Cause Order 58 by Mary Louise Garcia. (Friemel, Russell) Modified on 7/30/2015 to add text and create link (td). (Entered: 07/30/2015)
63 ORDER Setting All Pending Matters. Hearing set for 8/21/2015 02:00 PM before Judge Sam Sparks. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (os) (Entered: 08/11/2015)
64 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Christopher Daniel McNosky (McNosky, Christopher) (Entered: 08/19/2015)
65 ORDER re 64 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Christopher Daniel McNosky. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing for ALL PENDING MATTERS onFriday, August 21, 2015 at 02:00 PM is hereby CANCELLED until further order of thecourt. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (os) (Entered: 08/20/2015)
66 ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (os) (Entered: 08/21/2015)