Case: National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System

4:16-cv-03362 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas

Filed Date: April 4, 2013

Closed Date: June 7, 2021

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The Selective Service System (SSS) was created in 1917 by the federal government following the U.S. entry into World War I. The law currently requires that all male U.S. citizens, and certain categories of non-U.S. citizen men residing in the U.S., aged 18-25 register with the SSS within 30 days of turning 18. On January 24, 2013, the Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced that he was lifting the ban on women serving in combat roles in the U.S. military, removing the final barrier to women th…

The Selective Service System (SSS) was created in 1917 by the federal government following the U.S. entry into World War I. The law currently requires that all male U.S. citizens, and certain categories of non-U.S. citizen men residing in the U.S., aged 18-25 register with the SSS within 30 days of turning 18. On January 24, 2013, the Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced that he was lifting the ban on women serving in combat roles in the U.S. military, removing the final barrier to women theoretically serving in the military at an equal capacity to men.

On April 4, 2013, the National Coalition for Men (NCFM) and an individual plaintiff filed a class action suit against the SSS and its director, Lawrence G. Romo, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The plaintiffs sued under § 1983, alleging that the requirement that American men register for the draft violated the Equal Protection Clause under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments as a form of discrimination on the basis of sex. The plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief, attorneys' fees and any other relief deemed just by the court. The case was assigned to District Judge Dale S. Fischer.

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on June 17, 2013, on the basis that neither plaintiff had standing under the threshold requirement imposed by Article III of the Constitution. The defendants argued that the threshold requirement required both that the plaintiff must have suffered an injury and that there was a showing of jurisdiction. According to the defendants, the named plaintiff failed to adequately plead an injury, and the NCFM’s claim of organizational standing could not be demonstrated merely by claiming they were acting on the general behalf of male members of NCFM aged 18-25. The defendants also argued that the question of whether it was constitutional to only require men to register for the draft had already been litigated at the Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg.

On July 29, 2013, Judge Fischer granted the motion to dismiss filed by the defendants on the basis that the plaintiffs’ case was hypothetical and abstract, rather than ripe for review. In other words, the plaintiff’s claim was not urgent, and Rostker provided clear precedent. The court also noted that the plaintiffs’ case was based on the unsupported conclusion that the 2013 memo issued by Defense Secretary Panetta meant that all combat positions would be opened to women, as opposed to combat roles generally.

The plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit on September 26, 2013. On February 19, 2016, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the decision for further proceedings on the basis that the case could be fit for adjudication due to the Department of Defense’s new policies and the general advancement of women in society since the Rostker decision. The Ninth Circuit also held that extending the burden of registration to women or striking down the requirement for men could constitute an adequate remedy. 640 Fed. Appx. 664.

Back at the district court level, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss based on a lack of subject-matter jurisdiction for both plaintiffs and due to improper venue. The court held that the named plaintiff had standing to argue suffering an "injury in fact" as the standing minimum includes when the government imposes on affirmative obligation. NCFM was found to not have standing because it could not establish an injury to the organization and the named plaintiff was not identified as a member of the organization. Though the named plaintiff had standing, the court agreed that because he was a resident of Texas, the Central District of California was an improper venue. The case was dismissed without prejudice on November 9, 2016, and transferred to the Southern District of Texas.

On January 26, 2017, the named plaintiff filed a motion to amend his complaint to add another named plaintiff residing in Southern California who was an active member of the NCFM, and to reinstate the NCFM as a plaintiff. The plaintiff also filed a motion to transfer venue to the Southern District of California. The court granted plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint but denied his motion to transfer venue on the basis that he failed to show good cause.

The court refused to grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case. In the eyes of the court, the plaintiffs lacked standing due to a failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and no one suffered harm as a result of the SSS requirement. The court ruled that the requirement of registering with the SSS and obligation to update personal information constituted sufficient injury for standing. Regarding the plaintiffs’ claim, the defendants argued that the claim would intrude on congressional authority over military affairs and the court was still bound by the Rostker decision. The court responded that as in all policy areas, congressional authority over military affairs was subject to the Constitution, and that lifting the ban on women in combat roles created different factual circumstances from Rostker due to the recent lifting of the ban on women serving in combat and general advancement of women in all areas of society.

The plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment. The defendants filed a motion to stay proceedings and a cross-motion for summary judgment on the basis that Congress was considering modifying or abolishing current SSS requirements through the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service. On February 22, 2019, the court granted final judgment in favor of the plaintiffs but denied the plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief. Regarding the male-only registration requirement and the Equal Protection clause, the court ruled that in order to justify legislation that differentiates on the basis of gender, the defendants must show that the classification “serves important governmental objectives and that the discriminatory means employed are substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.” The court held that defendants did not sufficiently show that the male-only registration was substantially related to the congressional objective of raising and supporting armies. 355 F. Supp. 3d 568.

On April 22, 2019, the defendants filed an appeal with the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit reversed the lower court’s decision on October 5, 2020, on the basis that the district court lacked the authority to overturn precedent set by the Supreme Court in Rostker. 969 F.3d 546.

The plaintiffs’ appeal to the Supreme Court failed with a denial of a petition for hearing the case issued on June 7, 2021. In an opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court denied the petition on the basis of both deference to Congress on national defense and military affairs and the fact that Congress was actively reviewing gender-based registration through the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service. 141 S.Ct. 1815 (Mem).

Summary Authors

Hannah Juge (10/15/2021)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4543818/parties/national-coalition-for-men-v-selective-service-system/


Judge(s)

Berzon, Marsha Siegel (California)

Breyer, Stephen Gerald (District of Columbia)

Fischer, Dale S. (California)

Gould, Ronald Murray (Washington)

Kavanaugh, Brett M. (District of Columbia)

Miller, Gray Hampton (Texas)

Sotomayor, Sonia (District of Columbia)

Steeh, George Caram III (Michigan)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Angelucci, Marc Etienne (California)

Lee, Lynn Y. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Berzon, Marsha Siegel (California)

Breyer, Stephen Gerald (District of Columbia)

Fischer, Dale S. (California)

Gould, Ronald Murray (Washington)

Kavanaugh, Brett M. (District of Columbia)

Miller, Gray Hampton (Texas)

Sotomayor, Sonia (District of Columbia)

Steeh, George Caram III (Michigan)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Angelucci, Marc Etienne (California)

Lee, Lynn Y. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Diederich, Bryan Russell (District of Columbia)

Gerardi, Michael J. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

June 7, 2021 Docket
1

For Injunctive and Declaratory Relief

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

April 4, 2013 Complaint
32

Memorandum

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

640 Fed.Appx. 664

Feb. 19, 2016 Order/Opinion
44

(In Chambers) Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Transferring the Action to the Southern District of Texas (Dkt. 34)

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

2016 WL 11605246

Nov. 9, 2016 Order/Opinion

[Opinion of the Court Denying Petition for Writ of Certiorari]

Supreme Court of the United States

141 S.Ct. 1815

June 7, 2021 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

Judicial Independence, Employment Discrimination Studies Funded

Ann Nicholson

This brief article describes the Clearinghouse's award of $12,000 to build its collection of employment discrimination class actions brought by private plaintiffs. Nov. 1, 2008 https://law.wustl.edu/...

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4543818/national-coalition-for-men-v-selective-service-system/

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1 through 10 Inclusive, Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. Case assigned to Judge Dale S. Fischer for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle. (Filing fee $ 350 PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiffs National Coalition for Men, James Lesmeister. (et) (mg). (Entered: 04/04/2013)

April 4, 2013 RECAP

21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to Defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (et)

April 4, 2013 PACER
2

CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (et) (mg). (Entered: 04/04/2013)

April 4, 2013 PACER
3

NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) (Entered: 04/04/2013)

April 4, 2013 PACER
4

STANDING ORDER for Cases Assigned to Judge Dale S. Fischer (See document for specific details) by Judge Dale S. Fischer. (ir) (Entered: 04/05/2013)

April 5, 2013 PACER
5

PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff National Coalition for Men, James Lesmeister, upon Defendant Lawrence G Romo served on 4/17/2013, answer due 6/16/2013; Selective Service System served on 4/17/2013, answer due 6/16/2013. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Ely Sams. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to Theresa Wood. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to U.S. Attorney General. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt NOT attached. Original Summons NOT returned. Marc Angelucci (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 05/15/2013)

May 15, 2013 PACER
6

NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Bryan R Diederich on behalf of Defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System (Diederich, Bryan) (Entered: 06/17/2013)

June 17, 2013 PACER
7

** DOCUMENT STRICKEN ** NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendant Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. Motion set for hearing on 7/29/2013 at 01:30 PM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum, # 2 Exhibit A-D, # 3 Proposed Order)(Diederich, Bryan) Modified on 6/18/2013 (dp). (Entered: 06/17/2013)

June 17, 2013 PACER
8

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss Case 7 filed by Defendant Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-C)(Diederich, Bryan) (Entered: 06/17/2013)

June 17, 2013 PACER
9

NOTICE OF LODGING filed Table of Contents and Authorities re MOTION to Dismiss Case 7 (Attachments: # 1 Tables of Content & Authorities)(Diederich, Bryan) (Entered: 06/17/2013)

June 17, 2013 PACER
10

TEXT ONLY ENTRY: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENT: Document No. 7 filed on 6/17/13 is stricken for failure to comply with Local Rule 11-3.8 which requires that the title page includes the date and time of the hearing. Counsel also failed to provide where the hearing will be conducted. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dp) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 06/18/2013)

June 18, 2013 PACER
11

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendant Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. Motion set for hearing on 7/29/2013 at 01:30 PM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum, # 2 Exhibit A-C, # 3 Proposed Order)(Diederich, Bryan) (Entered: 06/19/2013)

June 19, 2013 PACER
12

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss Case 11 filed by Defendant Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-C)(Diederich, Bryan) (Entered: 06/19/2013)

June 19, 2013 PACER
13

** DOCUMENT STRICKEN ** Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Opposition re: MOTION to Dismiss Case 11 filed by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (Angelucci, Marc) Modified on 7/10/2013 (dp). (Entered: 07/08/2013)

July 8, 2013 PACER
14

NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Objection/Opposition (Motion related) 13 . The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s) are specified below. Other error(s) with document(s): The document was uploaded sideways. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (bp) (Entered: 07/09/2013)

July 9, 2013 PACER
15

TEXT ONLY ENTRY: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENT: Document No. filed on 7-8-13is stricken as the document is uploaded sideways. Counsel to refile properly. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dp) (Entered: 07/10/2013)

July 10, 2013 PACER
16

OPPOSITION OPPOSITION re: MOTION to Dismiss Case 11 filed by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 07/10/2013)

July 10, 2013 PACER
17

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION to Dismiss Case 11 filed by Defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Diederich, Bryan) (Entered: 07/15/2013)

July 15, 2013 PACER
18

TEXT ONLY ENTRY: (IN CHAMBERS) NOTICE: Judge Dale S. Fischer is participating in a pilot program regarding the submission of sealed documents. Effective July 8, 2013, all proposed documents related to under seal filings must be submitted via e-mail to the Judge's Chambers e-mail at DSF_Chambers@cacd.uscourts.gov. Please refer to the judge's pilot program procedures for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(dp) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/15/2013)

July 15, 2013 PACER
19

NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Lynn Y Lee on behalf of Defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System (Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 07/22/2013)

July 22, 2013 PACER
20

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER by Judge Dale S. Fischer: granting 11 Motion to Dismiss Case. (rne) (Entered: 07/29/2013)

July 29, 2013 PACER
21

MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Dale S. Fischer. See Minute Order for specifics. Court Reporter: Pamela Batalo. (dp) (Entered: 07/30/2013)

July 29, 2013 PACER
22

JUDGMENT by Judge Dale S. Fischer,IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff take nothing, that the action be dismissed, and that Defendants recover their costs of suit pursuant to a bill of costs filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. ยง 1920. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (shb) (Entered: 07/30/2013)

July 29, 2013 RECAP
23

NOTICE OF APPEAL to the 9th CCA filed by plaintiff James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. Appeal of Judgment 22 . Filed On: 07/29/2013; Entered On: 07/30/2013; Filing fee $455 paid receipt number LA079642. (Attachments: # 1 Appeal fee paid in the amount of $455.00.) (dmap) (Entered: 09/27/2013)

1 Appeal fee paid in the amount of $455.00.

View on RECAP

Sept. 26, 2013 RECAP
24

NOTIFICATION by Circuit Court of Appellate Docket Number 13-56690, 9th CCA regarding Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, 23 as to Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (car) (Entered: 09/30/2013)

Sept. 27, 2013 RECAP
25

ORDER from 9th CCA filed re: Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 23 filed by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men CCA # 13-56690. Appellant's motion for an extension of time to file the Transcript Designation Order Form and second request for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellants shall file the transcript designation. The transcript is due April 28, 2014. The opening brief is due June 27, 2014. The answering brief is due July 28, 2014 The optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the answering brief. Counsel is requested to seek a single extension of time adequate to permit preparation of the brief, rather than file multiple extension requests. See Advisory Note to 9th Cir. R. 31-2.2. Appellants shall serve a copy of this order on the court reporter at the district court. Order received in this district on 3/7/2014. (dmap) (Entered: 03/10/2014)

March 7, 2014 RECAP
26

DESIGNATION of Record on Appeal by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men re 23 (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 03/22/2014)

March 22, 2014 RECAP
27

MEMORANDUM from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals filed re: Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, 23 filed by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. CCA # 13-56690. REVERSED and REMANDED. (mat) (Entered: 02/22/2016)

Feb. 19, 2016 RECAP
28

MANDATE of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals filed re: Notice of Appeal 23 CCA # 13-56690. The judgment of the 9th Circuit Court, entered February 19, 2016, takes effect this date. This constitutes the formal mandate of the 9th CCA issued pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. [See USCA Memorandum 27 We(9th CCA) remand for the district court to consider the questions of standing otherthan the one we have addressed, and, if it has jurisdiction, the merits of the case.(mat) (Entered: 03/16/2016)

March 15, 2016 RECAP
29

ORDER from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals filed re: Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, 23 filed by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. CCA # 13-56690. The mandate issued on March 15, 2016 is recalled as issued in error. The case is a federal case but was not initially docketed as such and the mandate deadline was set according to civil case standards. Mandate deadline has been reset according to federal case standards. (mat) (Entered: 03/16/2016)

March 15, 2016 RECAP
30

MANDATE of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals filed re: Notice of Appeal 23 CCA # 13-56690. The judgment of the 9th Circuit Court, entered February 19, 2016, takes effect this date. This constitutes the formal mandate of the 9th CCA issued pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. [See USCA Memorandum 27 We remand for the district court to consider the questions of standing other than the one we have addressed, and, if it has jurisdiction, the merits of the case.REVERSED and REMANDED.] (mat) (Entered: 04/14/2016)

April 14, 2016 RECAP
31

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS Order re Response Pleading or Motion by Judge Dale S. Fischer: This case has been remanded by the Court of Appeals. Defendant's response to the complaint is due June 13, 2016. (bp) (Entered: 05/20/2016)

May 19, 2016 PACER
32

First STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to 08/05/16 filed by defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 05/27/2016)

May 27, 2016 PACER
33

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT, granting Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days) 32 . Having reviewed and approved the parties' stipulation to extend the time for defendants to respond to plaintiffs' Complaint, the Court hereby ORDERS that the deadline for defendants response to the Complaint be extended to August 5, 2016. (bp) (Entered: 05/31/2016)

May 31, 2016 PACER
34

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. Motion set for hearing on 10/24/2016 at 01:30 PM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Proposed Order) (Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 08/05/2016)

Aug. 5, 2016 PACER
35

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case 34 filed by Defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 08/05/2016)

Aug. 5, 2016 PACER
36

Joint STIPULATION to Reschedule Briefing Schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed by defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 08/05/2016)

Aug. 5, 2016 PACER
37

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMSIS by Judge Dale S. Fischer, re Stipulation to Reschedule 36 . The Court hereby ORDERS as follows: Plaintiffs will file their opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss by no later than September 26, 2016; Defendants will file their reply by no later than October 7, 2016. (bp) (Entered: 08/08/2016)

Aug. 8, 2016 PACER
38

** DOCUMENT STRICKEN ** OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case 34 filed by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (Angelucci, Marc) Modified on 9/23/2016 (dp). (Entered: 09/23/2016)

Sept. 23, 2016 PACER
39

TEXT ONLY ENTRY: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENT: Document No. 38 filed on 9/23/16 is stricken for failure to comply with L.R. 5-4.3.1 - which requires that the PDF image for a document filed with the Court must be created by using word processing software and published to PDF. PDF images created by scanning paper documents are prohibitedTHERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (dp) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 09/23/2016)

Sept. 23, 2016 PACER
40

OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case 34 filed by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 09/25/2016)

Sept. 25, 2016 PACER
41

REPLY in support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case 34 filed by Defendants Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 10/07/2016)

Oct. 7, 2016 PACER
42

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS Order to Show Cause re Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 11; Order Removing the Motion to Dismiss from the Court's Calendar by Judge Dale S. Fischer: (SEE MEMORANDUM FOR SPECIFICS) (bp) (Entered: 10/20/2016)

Oct. 19, 2016 PACER
43

Dismissal of Counts II & III filed by Plaintiffs James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 10/21/2016)

Oct. 21, 2016 PACER
44

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS Order GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and TRANSFERRING the Action to the Southern District of Texas (Dkt. 34) by Judge Dale S. Fischer: The Court dismisses NCM without prejudice and transfers the action to the Southern District of Texas (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.)(SEE MEMORANDUM FOR SPECIFICS) (bp) (Entered: 11/14/2016)

Nov. 9, 2016 RECAP
45

Transfer Out Transmittal Letter sent to USDC Southern District of Texas at Houston. (bp) (Entered: 11/14/2016)

Nov. 14, 2016 PACER
46

Case transferred in from California Central. Case Number 2:13-cv-02391; certified copy of transfer order, certified docket sheet, and transfer letter received (Entered: 11/15/2016)

1 *Restricted*

View on PACER

Nov. 15, 2016 RECAP
47

ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Scheduling Order Deadline date 12/30/2016(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 11/16/2016)

Nov. 16, 2016 PACER
48

MOTION for Lynn Lee to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 12/8/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Lynn Y. Lee)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 11/17/2016)

Nov. 17, 2016 PACER
49

ORDER granting 48 Motion for Lynn Lee to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(gclair, 4) (Entered: 11/17/2016)

Nov. 17, 2016 PACER
50

MOTION and ORDER GRANTING MOTION for Marc E Angelucci to appear pro hac vice on behalf of James Lesmeister.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 11/18/2016)

Nov. 18, 2016 PACER
51

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 12/12/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 11/21/2016)

Nov. 21, 2016 PACER
52

ORDER GRANTING 51 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint. Response due 12/15/2016.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 11/21/2016)

Nov. 21, 2016 PACER
53

ORDER setting Status Conference for 1/12/2017 at 10:00 AM by telephone before Judge Gray H Miller.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 12/07/2016)

Dec. 7, 2016 PACER
54

Joint MOTION to Stay Deadlines and Enter Schedule for Plaintiffs' Motions to Amend and Transfer by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 12/30/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 12/09/2016)

Dec. 9, 2016 PACER
55

ORDER GRANTING 54 Joint MOTION to Stay Deadlines and Enter Schedule for Plaintiffs' Motions to Amend and Transfer. Plaintiffs file their motion to amend complaint and motion to transfer no later than 1/27/2017; Defendants file their response, if any, to the motion to transfer by 2/15/2017; Plaintiffs file their reply, if necessary, by 2/27/2017; Defendants file their response to plaintiffs amended complaint, if leave to amend is granted, within forty-five days of the courts entry of plaintiffs amended complaint.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 12/14/2016)

Dec. 14, 2016 PACER
56

Mail Returned Undeliverable as to attorney Marc Etienne Angelucci as to James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men re: 47 Order for Initial Conference - FORM - Miller, filed. (bgarces, 7) (Entered: 01/10/2017)

Jan. 4, 2017 PACER
57

MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint by James Lesmeister, filed. Motion Docket Date 2/16/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Complaint)(Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 01/26/2017)

1 Complaint

View on RECAP

Jan. 26, 2017 RECAP
58

RESPONSE in Opposition to 57 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint, filed by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 02/15/2017)

Feb. 15, 2017 RECAP
59

MEMORANDUM OPINIONAND ORDER GRANTING 57 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint, DENYING MOTION for leave to transfer venue.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 08/16/2017)

Aug. 16, 2017 RECAP
60

First Amended Complaint by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed.(Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 08/18/2017)

Aug. 18, 2017 RECAP
61

Joint MOTION to Set Briefing Schedule for Motion to Dismiss by Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/27/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 09/06/2017)

Sept. 6, 2017 PACER
62

ORDER Granting 61 Motion to set briefing schedule. Motion to dismiss due 10/6/2017. Responses due 11/6/2017. Reply due 11/20/2017.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 09/14/2017)

Sept. 14, 2017 PACER
63

MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint by Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 10/27/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 10/06/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

3 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 6, 2017 RECAP
64

RESPONSE in Opposition to 63 MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, filed by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 11/02/2017)

Nov. 2, 2017 RECAP
65

REPLY in Support of 63 MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, filed by Selective Service System. (Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 11/20/2017)

Nov. 20, 2017 RECAP
66

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 63 MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 04/06/2018)

April 6, 2018 RECAP
67

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time Answer to First Amended Complaint by Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 5/3/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 04/12/2018)

April 12, 2018 PACER
68

ORDER Granting 67 Motion for Extension of Time; Answer due for All Defendants 5/4/2018.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 04/17/2018)

April 17, 2018 PACER
69

SCHEDULING ORDER. Jury trial. Pltf Expert Report due by 6/1/2018. Deft Expert Report due by 7/2/2018. Discovery due by 8/17/2018. Mediation due by 1/4/2019. Dispositive Motion Filing due by 9/14/2018. Non-Dispositive Motion Filing due by 9/14/2018. Objections due by 1/18/2019 Joint Pretrial Order due by 1/11/2019. Docket Call set for 1/25/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9D before Judge Gray H Miller(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 04/23/2018)

April 23, 2018 PACER
70

ANSWER to Complaint by Selective Service System, filed.(Lee, Lynn) (Entered: 05/04/2018)

May 4, 2018 RECAP
71

MOTION for Michael J. Gerardi to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 7/17/2018. (Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 06/26/2018)

June 26, 2018 PACER
72

ORDER granting 71 Motion for Michael J Gerardi to Appear Pro Hac Vice.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(gkelner, 4) (Entered: 06/27/2018)

June 26, 2018 PACER
73

MOTION for Summary Judgment by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/12/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declarations and Exhibits, # 2 Supplement Separate Statement)(Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 08/22/2018)

1 Exhibit Declarations and Exhibits

View on RECAP

2 Supplement Separate Statement

View on RECAP

Aug. 22, 2018 RECAP
74

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time Extension of Time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 73) And Setting Briefing Schedule by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/18/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 08/28/2018)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Aug. 28, 2018 RECAP
75

NOTICE to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment as to 73 MOTION for Summary Judgment by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/20/2018. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

Aug. 30, 2018 RECAP
76

Supplemental Exhibits to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment as to 73 MOTION for Summary Judgment by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/20/2018. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

Aug. 30, 2018 RECAP
77

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 74 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 73) And Setting Briefing Schedule. Response due 9/20/2018, reply due three days following. (Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 09/13/2018)

Sept. 13, 2018 RECAP
78

Unopposed MOTION for Clarification as to 77 Order,, MOTION for Reconsideration ( Motion Docket Date 10/5/2018.) by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 09/14/2018)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Sept. 14, 2018 RECAP
79

ORDER DENYING 78 Unopposed MOTION for Clarification/Reconsideration/Status Conference. (Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 09/17/2018)

Sept. 17, 2018 RECAP
80

MOTION to Stay Proceedings ( Motion Docket Date 10/11/2018.), Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. (Attachments: # 1 Response to Statement of Undisputed Facts, # 2 Gerardi Declaration, # 3 Exhibits to Gerardi Declaration, # 4 Proposed Order)(Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 09/20/2018)

1 Response to Statement of Undisputed Facts

View on RECAP

2 Gerardi Declaration

View on RECAP

3 Exhibits to Gerardi Declaration

View on RECAP

4 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Sept. 20, 2018 PACER
81

Opposed MOTION for Summary Judgment by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed. Motion Docket Date 10/15/2018. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 09/24/2018)

Sept. 24, 2018 RECAP
82

Unopposed MOTION to Stay Forthcoming Briefing Deadlines in Light of a Lapse in Appropriations by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/16/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Gerardi, Michael) Modified filers on 12/27/2018 (SarahShelby, 4). (Entered: 12/26/2018)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Dec. 26, 2018 RECAP
84

ORDER Granting 82 Motion to Stay upcoming pretrial deadlines.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 01/08/2019)

Dec. 27, 2018 PACER
83

Joint Mediation Statement by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed.(Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 12/31/2018)

Dec. 31, 2018 RECAP
85

NOTICE TO THE COURT OF RESTORATION OF APPROPRIATIONS by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. (Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 01/30/2019)

Jan. 30, 2019 PACER
86

NOTICE TO THE COURT OF COMMISSION REPORT by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 02/01/2019)

1 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

Feb. 1, 2019 RECAP
87

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 73 MOTION for Summary Judgment, DENYING 80 MOTION to Stay ProceedingsCross MOTION for Summary Judgment, DENYING 60 Plaintiff's request for injunction. (Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 02/23/2019)

Feb. 22, 2019 RECAP
88

FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of plaintiffs. Case terminated on 2/22/2019(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 02/23/2019)

Feb. 22, 2019 RECAP
89

Mail Returned Undeliverable as to attorney Bryan R Diederich as to Selective Service System re: 84 Order on Motion to Stay, filed. (ehernandez, 5) (Entered: 02/28/2019)

Feb. 28, 2019 PACER
90

Opposed MOTION for Summary Judgment ( Motion Docket Date 4/15/2019.), MOTION for Relief from Judgment by James Lesmeister, National Coalition for Men, filed. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declarations and Exhibits)(Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 03/24/2019)

1 Exhibit Declarations and Exhibits

View on RECAP

March 24, 2019 RECAP
91

Supplemental MOTION for Summary Judgment Points & Authorities by National Coalition for Men, filed. Motion Docket Date 5/1/2019. (Angelucci, Marc) (Entered: 04/10/2019)

April 10, 2019 RECAP
92

RESPONSE in Opposition to 91 Supplemental MOTION for Summary Judgment Points & Authorities, 90 Opposed MOTION for Summary Judgment MOTION for Relief from Judgment, filed by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System. (Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 04/15/2019)

April 15, 2019 RECAP
93

NOTICE OF APPEAL to US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit re: 87 Memorandum and Order, 88 Final Judgment by Lawrence G Romo, Selective Service System, filed. (Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 04/22/2019)

April 22, 2019 RECAP
94

PROPOSED ORDER re: 92 Response in Opposition to Motion,, filed.(Gerardi, Michael) (Entered: 04/23/2019)

April 23, 2019 PACER

Appeal Review Notes

April 23, 2019 PACER
95

Clerks Notice of Filing of an Appeal. The following Notice of Appeal and related motions are pending in the District Court: 93 Notice of Appeal. Fee status: GOV. Reporter(s): P. Batalo, filed. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Appeal) (EdnitaPonce, 1) (Entered: 04/23/2019)

April 23, 2019 PACER

Appeal Review Notes re: 93 Notice of Appeal. Fee status: GOV. The appellant is a U.S. government agency, and no fee is required.Hearings were held in the case. DKT13 transcript order form(s) due within 14 days of the filing of the notice of appeal. Number of DKT-13 Forms expected: 1, filed.(EdnitaPonce, 1)

April 23, 2019 PACER
96

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 90 Opposed MOTION for Relief from Judgment, DENYING 91 Supplemental MOTION for Summary Judgment Points & Authorities.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4) (Entered: 04/29/2019)

April 29, 2019 RECAP

USCA Case Number

May 2, 2019 PACER

State / Territory: Texas

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 4, 2013

Closing Date: June 7, 2021

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The National Coalition for Men is a men's rights organization founded in 1976 that describes itself as "the oldest organization in the world that advocates for equal rights for men and women," and is dedicated to examining how men are adversely affected by sex discrimination. James Lesmeister is a male resident of Texas. Anthony Davis is a male resident of California who was added to the complaint to get in an effort transfer the case to CA.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Selective Service System, Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

Discrimination-area:

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Male