1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK; MICHAEL 

G. ANDREN; TACTICAL MACHINING, 

LLC, a limited liability company; and 

FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC., 

a nonprofit corporation, 

 Plaintiffs, 

BLACKHAWK MANUFACTURING 

GROUP INC. d/b/a 80 PERCENT ARMS, 

Intervenor Plaintiff, 

DEFENSE DISTRIBUTED, and SECOND 

AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC., 

Intervenor Plaintiffs, 

and 

POLYMER80, INC., 

Applicant in Intervention, 

v. 

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official 

capacity as Attorney General of the United 

States; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 

OF JUSTICE; STEVEN DETTELBACH, 

in his official capacity as Director of the 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 

Explosives; and BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, 

TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND 

EXPLOSIVES, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 

4:22-cv-00691-O 

POLYMER80, INC.’S MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING SCHEDULING AND 

BRIEF IN SUPPORT THEREOF 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 160 Filed 01/09/23 Page 1 of 5 PageID 3022
2 

 Applicant in Intervention Polymer80, Inc. (“Polymer80”) respectfully files this Motion for 

Expedited Briefing Schedule and Brief in Support Thereof and would show the Court as follows: 

I.

ARGUMENT

 On January 9, 2023, Polymer80 filed its Motion to Intervene in the above captioned action 

for purposes of challenging on constitutional and administrative grounds the Final Rule at issue in 

this action, Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms, 87 Fed. Reg. 24,652 

(Apr. 26, 2022) (hereinafter “Final Rule”), the ATF’s Open Letter of December 27, 2022, Open 

Letter to All Firearms Licensees: Impact of Final Rule 2021-05F on Partially Complete 

Polymer80, Lone Wolf, and Similar Semiautomatic Pistol Frames, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms and Explosives (Dec. 27, 2022) (hereinafter “Open Letter”), and the ATF’s December 

27, 2020 Letter to Mr. Loran Kelley (hereinafter “Polymer80 Letter”) and to obtain declaratory 

and injunctive relief from enforcement of these administrative actions. 

An expedited briefing schedule for its Motion to Intervene is appropriate here for several 

reasons. First, an expedited briefing schedule will allow Polymer80 to expeditiously obtain 

injunctive relief. Polymer80 intends to promptly move for a preliminary injunction to obtain relief 

from enforcement of the Final Rule, Open Letter, and the Polymer80 Letter, which threaten to 

harm and potentially destroy its business. Given the substantial threat of irreparable harm to its 

business, Polymer80 respectfully requests an expedited briefing schedule on its Motion to 

Intervene. 

Second, an expedited briefing schedule will allow Polymer80 to participate in the 

summary-judgment motion practice, which is currently underway in the case, in accordance with 

the existing scheduling order. As stated in its Motion to Intervene, Polymer80 intends to adopt 

and incorporate existing plaintiffs’ summary-judgment briefing, which was filed on December 23, 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 160 Filed 01/09/23 Page 2 of 5 PageID 3023
3 

2022. However, if the Motion to Intervene proceeds on a non-expedited briefing schedule, the 

parties will have completed their summary-judgment briefing before Polymer80’s intervenes. An 

expedited briefing schedule will provide Polymer80 a meaningful opportunity to participate in the 

current summary-judgment briefing. 

Finally, an expedited schedule would not prejudice the parties opposing Polymer80’s 

Motion to Intervene. Polymer80 relies on similar factual and legal bases as the two previous 

Motions to Intervene in this action, both of which were granted (Docs. 76-77 & 116-117). The 

parties opposing Polymer80’s motion are well aware of the arguments they can make in response 

and would not be prejudiced by an expedited schedule. 

 For these reasons, the Court should set an expedited briefing schedule for Polymer80’s 

Motion to Intervene. 

II. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

 WHEREFORE, Polymer80, Inc. respectfully requests that this Court enter an expedited 

briefing schedule requiring parties to file responses, if any, to Polymer80, Inc.’s Motion to 

Intervene within five business days and for Polymer80, Inc. to file its reply within three business 

days following the response(s). Polymer80, Inc. further requests that this Court grant it any other 

relief to which it is justly entitled. 

 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 160 Filed 01/09/23 Page 3 of 5 PageID 3024
4 

Respectfully submitted, 

BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP 

By: /s/ Dennis L. Daniels Jr. 

DENNIS L. DANIELS JR. 

Texas Bar No. 24107402 

dldaniels@bradley.com

3600 Fountain Place 

1445 Ross Avenue 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

Telephone (214) 257-9800 

Facsimile (214) 939-8787 

JAMES W. PORTER, III (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

jporter@bradley.com

MARC A. NARDONE (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

mnardone@bradley.com

BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP 

1615 L Street NW 

Suite 1350 

Washington, D.C. 20036 

Telephone (202) 393-7150 

Facsimile (202) 347-1684 

ATTORNEYS FOR POLYMER80, INC. 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 160 Filed 01/09/23 Page 4 of 5 PageID 3025
5 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I certify that on January 9, 2023, the foregoing document was served, via the Court’s 

CM/ECF Document Filing System, upon the registered CM/ECF users in this action. 

 /s/ Dennis L. Daniels 

 Dennis L. Daniels 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 160 Filed 01/09/23 Page 5 of 5 PageID 3026