Case: Heindel v. Andino

COMPLAINT against Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0420-7878706.), filed by Phil Leventis, Frank Heindel. Service due by 10/9/2018 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Plaintiff Phil P. Leventis, # 2 Exhibit 2 - Declaration of Plaintiff Frank Heindel, # 3 Exhibit A (PART 1) to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Excerpts from Department of Homeland Security Cyber Hygiene Assessments, # 4 Exhibit A (PART 2) to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Excerpts from Department of Homeland Security Cyber Hygiene Assessments, # 5 Exhibit B to Dec. of Frank Heindel - South Carolina National Guard Defensive Cyber Operations Element's Rapid Vulnerability Assessments of South Carolinas County Election Information Security Posture, # 6 Exhibit C to Dec. of Frank Heindel - State Election Commission Risk Analysis (DRAFT), # 7 Exhibit D to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email from Defendant Andino dated November 1, 2016, # 8 Exhibit E to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email from the Center for Internet Security dated August 1, 2016, # 9 Exhibit F to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email to Defendant Andino dated June 27, 2016, # 10 Exhibit G to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email Correspondence Between SEC Employees, # 11 Exhibit H to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email Correspondence Between ES&S and SEC Employees, # 12 Exhibit I to Dec. of Frank Heindel - South Carolina General Assembly Legislative Audit Council Report, # 13 Exhibit 3 - Excerpts from the EVEREST Report: Evaluation and Validation of Election- Related Equipment, Standards and Testing)(abuc) (Entered: 07/11/2018)

1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Plaintiff Phil P. Leventis

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 2 - Declaration of Plaintiff Frank Heindel

View on PACER

3 Exhibit A (PART 1) to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Excerpts from Department of Homela

View on PACER

4 Exhibit A (PART 2) to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Excerpts from Department of Homela

View on PACER

5 Exhibit B to Dec. of Frank Heindel - South Carolina National Guard Defensive Cyb

View on PACER

6 Exhibit C to Dec. of Frank Heindel - State Election Commission Risk Analysis (DR

View on PACER

7 Exhibit D to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email from Defendant Andino dated November

View on PACER

8 Exhibit E to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email from the Center for Internet Security

View on PACER

9 Exhibit F to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email to Defendant Andino dated June 27, 2

View on PACER

10 Exhibit G to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email Correspondence Between SEC Employees

View on PACER

11 Exhibit H to Dec. of Frank Heindel - Email Correspondence Between ES&S and SEC

View on PACER

12 Exhibit I to Dec. of Frank Heindel - South Carolina General Assembly Legislative

View on PACER

13 Exhibit 3 - Excerpts from the EVEREST Report: Evaluation and Validation of Elect

View on PACER

Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis.(abuc) (Entered: 07/11/2018)

Summons Issued as to Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright. (abuc) (Entered: 07/11/2018)

First MOTION for Summary Judgment by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright. Response to Motion due by 8/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. No proposed order.(Hunter, Thomas) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/30/2018: # 1 Memo in Support, # 2 Exhibit A - Applicable Statutes) (abuc, ). supplement 43 filed on 1/4/2019 (asni, ). (Entered: 07/30/2018)

1 Memo in Support

View on Clearinghouse

2 Exhibit A - Applicable Statutes

View on PACER

Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright.(Hunter, Thomas) (Entered: 07/30/2018)

NOTICE of Appearance by Harley Littleton Kirkland on behalf of Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright (Kirkland, Harley) (Entered: 07/30/2018)

DELETION OF DOCKET ENTRY NUMBER 6 Reason: Filed separately but should have been filed as an attachment to entry 5. Corrected Filing Document Number 5 Modified filing date to that of original filing: 07/30/2018 Response due date modified to that of original filing: n/a (abuc) (Entered: 07/30/2018)

MOTION for Extension of Time to respond to 5 First Motion for Summary Judgment by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 8/17/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(Manos, Marcus) Modified on 8/6/2018: to add link to 5 Motion (kmca). (Entered: 08/03/2018)

TEXT ORDER granting 11 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiffs' response to the 5 motion for summary judgment is due by August 28, 2018. Entered at the direction of the Honorable Donald C Coggins, Jr on 8/6/18.(kmca) (Entered: 08/06/2018)

RESPONSE in Opposition re 5 First MOTION for Summary Judgment Response filed by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis.Reply to Response to Motion due by 9/4/2018 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Manos, Marcus) Supplemental document 28 added on 9/26/2018 (asni, ). (Entered: 08/28/2018)

REPLY to Response to Motion re 5 First MOTION for Summary Judgment Response filed by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright. (Kirkland, Harley) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jamila Goldkamp Benkato ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-7974083) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 9/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Admission Pro Hac Vice)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Samantha V. Ettari ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-7974129) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 9/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Pro Hac Vice Admission)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by David S. Frankel ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-7974137) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 9/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Pro Hac Vice Admission)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jessica Ann Marsden ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-7974145) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 9/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Attachment 1 replaced with corrected document provided by filing user on 9/10/2018) (abuc). (Entered: 08/30/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Harry P. Morgenthau ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-7974156) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 9/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Pro Hac Vice Admission)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 08/30/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Laurence Michael Schwartztol ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-7974176) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 9/13/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Attachment 1 replaced to correct clerical error on 9/10/2018) (abuc). (Entered: 08/30/2018)

DELETION OF DOCKET ENTRY NUMBER 22 Reason: Filing attorney refiled attachment in error. Corrected Filing Document Number 21 Modified filing date to that of original filing: 08/30/2018 Response due date modified to that of original filing: 9/13/2018 (abuc) (Entered: 09/10/2018)

TEXT ORDER granting 16 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting 17 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting 18 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting 19 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting 20 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting 21 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Honorable Donald C Coggins, Jr on 9/11/2018.(abuc) (Entered: 09/11/2018)

Case Reassigned to Judge Honorable J Michelle Childs. Judge Honorable Donald C Coggins, Jr no longer assigned to the case. (suro, ) (Entered: 09/12/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Nancy Gertner ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-8010679) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 10/4/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 09/20/2018)

TEXT ORDER granting 26 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 9/20/2018.(asni, ) (Entered: 09/20/2018)

SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by Phil Leventis to 14 Response in Opposition to Motion. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Court Ruling: Curling V. Kemp) refiled by the clerk to correct event type.(asni, ) (Entered: 09/25/2018)

First MOTION to Stay Scheduling Order, Disclosure, and Conference Requirements by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright. Response to Motion due by 10/31/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. No proposed order.(Hunter, Thomas) (Entered: 10/17/2018)

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Anne Harden Tindall ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0420-8058547) by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 10/31/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Application/Affidavit for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 10/17/2018)

TEXT ORDER granting 31 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 10/17/2018.(asni, ) (Entered: 10/17/2018)

RESPONSE in Opposition re 30 First MOTION to Stay Scheduling Order, Disclosure, and Conference Requirements Response filed by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis.Reply to Response to Motion due by 10/30/2018 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-Plaintiffs' 26(f) Report and 26.03 Responses, # 2 Exhibit B-Proposed Conference and Scheduling Order, # 3 Exhibit C-Commission's Submission for Federal Funds)(Eslinger, Victoria) (Entered: 10/23/2018)

REPLY to Response to Motion re 30 First MOTION to Stay Scheduling Order, Disclosure, and Conference Requirements Response filed by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright. (Hunter, Thomas) (Entered: 10/29/2018)

NOTICE of Appearance by Wesley Aaron Vorberger on behalf of Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright (Vorberger, Wesley) (Entered: 11/05/2018)

MOTION to Compel Discovery by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. Response to Motion due by 12/17/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Memo in Support Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Supporting Documents Rule 11 Certification)No proposed order.(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 12/03/2018)

RESPONSE in Opposition re 37 MOTION to Compel Discovery Response filed by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright.Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/11/2018 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Vorberger, Wesley) (Entered: 12/04/2018)

MOTION for Protective Order by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright. Response to Motion due by 1/4/2019. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Supporting Documents Rule 26(c)(1) Certification)No proposed order.(Vorberger, Wesley) (Entered: 12/21/2018)

NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 5 First MOTION for Summary Judgment 30 First MOTION to Stay 37 MOTION to Compel < 41 MOTION for Protective Order : Motion Hearing set for 1/15/2019 03:30 PM in Columbia # 3, Matthew J. Perry Court House, 901 Richland St, Columbia before Honorable J Michelle Childs. This hearing will include all motions not yet ruled on prior to the hearing. (asni, ) (Entered: 12/26/2018)

SUPPLEMENT by Marci Andino, Mark A. Benson, Marilyn Bowers, Billy Way, Jr, Nicole Spain Wright to 5 First MOTION for Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss Memorandum in Support. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Vorberger, Wesley) (Entered: 01/04/2019)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

RESPONSE in Opposition re 41 MOTION for Protective Order Response filed by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis.Reply to Response to Motion due by 1/11/2019 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of Marcus A Manos in Support, # 2 Exhibit A to Declaration, # 3 Exhibit B to Declaration)(Manos, Marcus) (Entered: 01/04/2019)

RESPONSE in Opposition re 5 First MOTION for Summary Judgment Response filed by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis.Reply to Response to Motion due by 1/18/2019 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-Fiscal Year 2015-16 Accountability Report)(Manos, Marcus) supplement 51 added on 1/18/2019 (asni, ). (Entered: 01/11/2019)

TEXT ORDER: This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery-Rule 26(a)(1) Disclosures (ECF No. 37), filed December 3, 2018. In their motion, Plaintiffs seek an order compelling Defendants to serve their initial disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(1) and 37. (Id. at 1.) Plaintiffs provided their initial disclosures to Defendants on November 2, 2018. (Id. at 1.) On December 4, 2018, Defendants filed a Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Initial Disclosures (ECF No. 38), seeking to stay discovery pending the outcome of their potentially dispositive Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 5) and on the basis that the parties have not yet conferred in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). (ECF No. 38 at 25.) Because the court has not yet ruled upon Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 5), and such Motion addresses a jurisdictional concern as to whether Plaintiffs have standing to bring this matter, for purposes of judicial economy, the court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery-Rule 26(a)(1) Disclosures 37 . Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 1/14/2019.(asni, ) (Entered: 01/14/2019)

TEXT ORDER: This matter is before the court on Defendants' Motion to Stay Scheduling Order and Disclosure and Conference Requirements filed on October 17, 2018. (ECF No. 30.) Pursuant to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 16.00(C), Defendants request that the court "stay the entry of any scheduling order, and all federal and local civil rule disclosure and conference requirements, until their first motion for summary judgment has been ruled upon." (Id. at 1.) Defendants argue the requested stay is appropriate because, "Depending on the [c]ourt's ruling, Defendants' dispositive [M]otion could resolve the casemooting any discovery[-]related concerns." (Id. at 2.) Defendants further assert that because discovery in this case has not begun in full, a stay would not prejudice Plaintiffs. (Id.) On October 23, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery. (ECF No. 33.) Plaintiffs argue a stay of discovery is inappropriate in this case given "the time sensitivity of the litigation" and the important constitutional rightsthe Fourteenth Amendment right to voteat issue. (Id. at 25.) Specifically, Plaintiffs assert that "in order for Plaintiffs' constitutional claims to be adjudicated sufficiently in advance of the 2020 primary elections... including allowing sufficient time for implementation of any remedy the [c]ourt may order, Plaintiffs believe that a trial on the merits should occur by early summer 2019." (Id. at 2.) Moreover, Plaintiffs maintain that they "do not seek a burdensome amount of discovery." (Id. at 6.) On December 21, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion for Protective Order "to prevent discovery until Defendants' dispositive motions have been heard." (ECF No. 41 at 2.) In that Motion, Defendants stated that, "Many of the arguments in favor of, and related to, a protective order were also made in the briefing for Defendants' [M]otion to [S]tay... To the extent those arguments are applicable now, they are incorporated herein." (Id. at 3 n.2.) Defendants' requested that the court "grant Defendants' [M]otion for a [P]rotective [O]rder and stay any and all discovery requests until the pending dispositive motions have been resolved." (Id. at 9.) Under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court may, in its discretion, stay discovery pending resolution of dispositive motions. See Thigpen v. United States, 800 F.2d 393, 39697 (4th Cir. 1986) ("Nor did the court err by granting the government's motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) to stay discovery pending disposition of the 12(b)(1) motion.... Trial courts... are given wide discretion to control this discovery process...."). Additionally, under Rule 16.00(C) of the Local Civil Rules, "[t]he court may stay entry of the scheduling order(s) and all federal and local civil rule disclosure and conference requirements pending resolution of a motion to remand or to dismiss or other dispositive motion." Local Civ. Rule 16.00(C) (D.S.C.). "Federal district courts often stay discovery pending the outcome of dispositive motions that will terminate the case." Cleveland Const., Inc. v. Schenkel & Schultz Architects, P.A., No. 3:08-CV-407RJCDCK, 2009 WL 903564, at *2 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 31, 2009) (collecting cases). In determining whether to issue a stay, the court considers the following factors: "the potential for the dispositive motion to terminate all the claims in the case or all the claims against particular defendants, strong support for the dispositive motion on the merits, and irrelevancy of the discovery at issue to the dispositive motion." Somie v. GEO Grp., Inc., No. 5:09-CT-3142-FL, 2011 WL 1831695, at *1 (E.D.N.C. May 12, 2011). Based on those factors, the court finds a stay of discovery is warranted. The parties have fully briefed the issue of whether this case should be dismissed for lack of standing, which, being a jurisdictional issue, could be dispositive of the entire matter. See Dreher v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., 856 F.3d 337, 343 (4th Cir. 2017) ("Standing 'is a threshold jurisdictional question' that ensures a suit is 'appropriate for the exercise of the [federal] courts judicial powers." (quoting Pye v. United States, 269 F.3d 459, 466 (4th Cir. 2001))). Furthermore, Plaintiffs do not argue that discovery is relevant or necessary for the court's resolution of the issues raised in Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 5.) Thus, due to the dispositive nature of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, and in the interest of preserving the resources of the court and the parties, the court finds a stay of discovery is warranted in this case. See Somie, 2011 WL 1831695, at *1. While the court empathizes with Plaintiffs' desire to move this matter along expediently because of the impending 2020 election, if Plaintiffs' prevail on the issue of standing, the court can address the need for an expedited discovery schedule. Therefore, the court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Stay Scheduling Order and Disclosure and Conference Requirements 30, and DENIES AS MOOT Defendants' Motion for Protective Order 41 . Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 1/15/2019.(asni, ) (Entered: 01/15/2019)

Minute Entry. Proceedings held before Honorable J Michelle Childs: taking under advisement 5 Motion for Summary Judgment; Motion Hearing held on 1/15/2019. Written order forthcoming. Court Reporter Jenny Williams. (mbro, ) (Entered: 01/16/2019)

NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings. Motion to Dismiss held on January 15, 2019, before Judge J. Michelle Childs. Court Reporter/Transcriber Jennifer H. Williams, RPR, E-mail Jenny_Williams@scd.uscourts.gov. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Parties have 7 calendar days from the filing of the transcript to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction.. Redaction Request due 2/8/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 2/19/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 4/18/2019. (jwil, ) (Entered: 01/18/2019)

SUPPLEMENT by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis to 45 Response in Opposition to Motion, . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A / 04-05 Accountability Report, # 2 Exhibit B / 03-04 Accountability Report)(Manos, Marcus) Modified to correct filing date on 1/22/2019 (asni, ). (Entered: 01/22/2019)

DELETION OF DOCKET ENTRY NUMBER 50 Reason: document was filed incorrectly. Corrected Filing Document Number 51 Modified filing date to that of original filing: 1/18/2019 (asni, ) (Entered: 01/22/2019)

Letter from Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit RFP Amendment - 1, # 2 Exhibit RFP Amendment - 2)(Vorberger, Wesley) (Entered: 02/04/2019)

ORDER AND OPINION The court grants Defendants' Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (ECF No. 5 at 1); (2) DISMISSES Plaintiffs' Complaint (ECF No. 1) without prejudice; (3) DENIES Defendants' Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as moot (ECF No. 5 at 1); and (4) considers Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 5 to be withdrawn based on Defendants' representation at the hearing on these motions (ECF No. 49 at 13:1418). (asni, ) Modified to edit text and correct scriveners error on 2/8/2019 (asni, ). (Main Document 55 replaced on 2/8/2019) (asni, ). (Entered: 02/08/2019)

JUDGMENT in favor of defendants against plaintiffs and dismissing the complaint without prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the FRCP. (asni, ) (Main Document 56 replaced on 2/8/2019) (asni, ). Modified to edit text on 2/8/2019 (asni, ). (Entered: 02/08/2019)

NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 55 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,, by Frank Heindel, Phil Leventis. - Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0420-8285972. The Docketing Statement form, Transcript Order form and CJA 24 form may be obtained from the Fourth Circuit website at www.ca4.uscourts.gov (Manos, Marcus) (Main Document 57 replaced on 2/25/2019) (asni, ). Modified to replace document to correct case number on 2/25/2019 (asni, ). (Entered: 02/22/2019)

Transmittal Sheet for Notice of Appeal to USCA re 57 Notice of Appeal, The Clerk's Office hereby certifies the record and the docket sheet available through ECF to be the certified list in lieu of the record and/or the certified copy of the docket entries. (asni, ) (Entered: 02/25/2019)

USCA MANDATE and ORDER granting Motion to dismiss appeal pursuant to FRAP 42(b) ; granting Motion to vacate as to 57 Notice of Appeal, filed by Phil Leventis, Frank Heindel. (Attachments: # 1 order)(asni, ) (Entered: 11/06/2019)