Perlmutter Seeks Summary Judgement in Copyright Office Battle

The battle for Copyright Office management isn’t letting up: Shira Perlmutter is now searching for a high-speed abstract judgement decision, whereas the Trump administration is firing again in opposition to the sought “fast-track schedule.”  

Those developments would possibly come as a shock in mild of the court docket’s most up-to-date dedication. Upon denying Perlmutter’s restraining order ask, the presiding choose additionally instructed the events to “submit a joint proposed briefing schedule” regarding a possible preliminary injunction push on the plaintiff’s finish, we reported yesterday.

Instead, Perlmutter’s authorized group has opted to entreat the court docket to green-light an “expedited briefing schedule” on the abstract judgement entrance.

There’s “a pressing need for both the parties and the public to obtain a speedy resolution of this matter,” the previous USCO head indicated, “as the leadership of the Library of Congress and the Copyright Office will remain in dispute until the legality of Defendants’ actions is adjudicated on the merits.

“It would best serve judicial economy and the interests of the parties to proceed to final judgment,” the plaintiff summed up.

That refers particularly to a desired June fifth deadline for the precise abstract judgement movement, a June twelfth cutoff for the defendants’ response, and 4 days thereafter for Perlmutter’s reply.

However, if “expedited summary judgment is unavailable,” Perlmutter would really like “an opportunity” to hammer out the aforementioned preliminary injunction schedule, per the authorized doc.

As highlighted, the Trump administration isn’t on board with the quick-moving schedule, which it formally opposed in a submitting in the present day.

“But there is nothing ‘pressing’ about a legal issue remaining ‘in dispute’ until an adjudication on the merits after a case has run its normal course,” the Justice Department penned.

“That is true of all litigation, but that fact does not give every plaintiff a right to expedited proceedings,” the Trump administration continued. “And it especially should not here, where this Court recognized in denying the motion for a temporary restraining order that Plaintiff has failed to show that any of the purported harms she identified are either irreparable or imminent.”

Besides rejecting the rapid-fire schedule, the court docket shouldn’t entertain Perlmutter’s above-described request to cement a preliminary injunction timetable, the defendants stated in additional phrases.

“This Court gave Plaintiff that opportunity already,” the DOJ wrote, “but rather than propose a schedule for preliminary injunction briefing to Defendants, Plaintiff filed her present motion. That is no doubt because Plaintiff does not believe she could obtain a preliminary injunction given this Court’s holding that she has failed to show the irreparable harm necessary for emergency injunctive relief.”

How, then, ought to the case proceed? According to the Trump administration, a June fifth “or later” abstract judgement cutoff for the plaintiff could be appropriate, adopted by a three-week window for an opposition response and a cross-motion for abstract judgement.

From there, Team Perlmutter would have one other three weeks but to reply, with the defendants’ reply in assist of the abstract judgement cross-motion due inside two extra weeks.

At the time of writing, the court docket hadn’t weighed in on the opposing views. Despite the advantage of frequent updates to this point, although, it’s doable that the case will spin out over weeks (if not months ought to a full authorized continuing happen).