State of Washington, et al v. Donald J. Trump, et al

Filing 56

Filed (ECF) joinder letter in lieu of amicus brief pursuant to Circuit Advisory Committee Note to Rule 29-1. Filed by Pivotal Software, Inc., joining in brief(s) [19]. Date of service: 02/06/2017. [10303796] [17-35105] (Block, Micah) [Entered: 02/06/2017 01:20 PM]

Download PDF
February 6, 2017 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 1010 Fifth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General, Washington State Office of the Attorney General 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98104 Lori Swanson Attorney General, Minnesota Office of the Attorney General 445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1100 St. Paul, MN 55101 Noel J. Francisco Acting Solicitor General Civil Division, Room 7241 U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20530 RE: State of Washington & State of Minnesota v. Trump, Case No. 17-35105 Pivotal Software, Inc.’s Joinder Letter in Lieu of Amicus Brief To the Court and Counsel: I write on behalf of Pivotal Software, Inc. pursuant to the Circuit Advisory Committee Note to Rule 29-1 to express Pivotal’s support for and joinder in the factual statements and arguments submitted to the Court in the February 5, 2017 Motion for Leave to File Brief of Technology Companies and Other Businesses as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees, and the Brief attached thereto (ECF No. 19). Pivotal Software, Inc. is a leading technology company and its operations are affected by the Executive Order issued on January 27, 2017, entitled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” As set forth in the amicus brief, the Order represents a significant departure from the principles of fairness and predictability that have governed the immigration system of the United States for more than fifty years— and the Order inflicts significant harm on American business, innovation, and growth as a result. The Order makes it more difficult and expensive for U.S. companies to recruit, hire, and retain some of the world’s best employees. It disrupts ongoing business operations. And it threatens companies’ ability to attract talent, business, and investment to the United States. Respectfully submitted, s/ Andrew M. Cohen Andrew M. Cohen SVP, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary th 875 Howard Street, 5 Floor | San Francisco, CA 94103 | +1 (415) 777-4868 | pivotal.io 9th Circuit Case Number(s) 17-35105 NOTE: To secure your input, you should print the filled-in form to PDF (File > Print > PDF Printer/Creator). ********************************************************************************* CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on (date) . 2/6/2017 I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system. Signature (use "s/" format) s/ Micah G. Block ********************************************************************************* CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When Not All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on (date) . Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the appellate CM/ECF system. I further certify that some of the participants in the case are not registered CM/ECF users. I have mailed the foregoing document by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have dispatched it to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days to the following non-CM/ECF participants: Signature (use "s/" format)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?