Title: Khalid v. Twitter, Inc.
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 463, 2022
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: June 7, 2023

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
ATM SHAFIQUL KHALID, 
 
 
Proposed 
Intervenor 
Below,   
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
TWITTER, INC., 
 
Plaintiff 
and 
Counterclaim-
Defendant Below, Appellee, 
 
and 
 
ELON R. MUSK, X HOLDINGS I, 
INC., and X HOLDINGS II, INC., 
 
Defendants and Counterclaim-
Plaintiffs Below, Appellees. 
 
§ 
§  No. 463, 2022 
§ 
§  Court Below—Court of 
§  Chancery of the State of  
§  Delaware 
§   
§  C.A. No. 2022-0613 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
  Submitted:  April 28, 2023 
 
 
 
 
 
  Decided:  June 7, 2023 
 
Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices. 
 
ORDER 
 
After consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, we find it 
evident that the judgment of the Court of Chancery should be affirmed on the basis 
of and for the reasons stated in the court’s letter decisions dated November 15, 2022, 
and November 28, 2022.  This expedited litigation was dismissed under Court of 
Chancery Rule 41(a)(1)(ii).  Voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) renders a 
2 
 
pending motion to intervene moot.1  Whether the motion to intervene was filed 
before or after the stipulated dismissal is irrelevant.2 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of 
Chancery is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
       Chief Justice 
 
1 See, e.g., Silber v. Airbnb, Inc., 2019 WL 3997098, at *1 (D. Del. Aug. 23, 2019) (dismissing 
motion to intervene as of right, which was filed approximately three weeks before the parties filed 
a stipulation of dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), as moot). 
2 See id. (“The timing of the motion to intervene, either before or after the stipulated dismissal, is 
irrelevant.”).