AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION, INC. et al v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.

Filing 83

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant by SINA BAHRAM (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Proposed Amicus Curiae Brief of Sina Bahram in Support of Defendant, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Pearlman, Jeffrey)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
ASSOCIATION, INC.;

Case No. 1:14-CV-00857-TSC-DAR

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION, INC.; and

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS
CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT
OF DEFENDANT

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF MEASUREMENT IN
EDUCATION, INC.,
Plaintiffs,

Action Filed: May 23, 2014

v.
PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.,
Defendant

Sina Bahram respectfully moves for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of
Defendant in the above-captioned matter. The proposed brief is attached to this motion.
Mr. Bahram is a digital accessibility researcher and advocate and chief technology officer
and co-founder of the International Association of Visually Impaired Technologists (“IAVIT”).
In addition to researching human computer interaction, intelligent user interfaces, and artificial
intelligence with the goal of helping users with disabilities, Mr. Bahram advocates on behalf of
disabled individuals and organizations representing their interests. Mr. Bahram has authored
numerous publications advocating for technical solutions to accessibility challenges, see Sina
Bahram, Publications, https://www.sinabahram.com/publications.php (last visited Feb. 11,
2016), and has been honored by the White House as a “Champion of Change” for his
accessibility work. See Matt Shipman, White House Honors Sina Bahram as a “Champion of
Change,” CSC News (May 7, 2012), http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/news/1322; The White House,
Champions of Change: Sina Bahram, https://www.whitehouse.gov/champions/stem-equality-for1

americans-with-disabilities/sina-bahram- (last visited Feb. 11, 2016). Additionally, Mr. Bahram
serves on several boards of conferences and organizations related to accessibility and, through
his consulting service Prime Access Consulting, works with clients to achieve digital
accessibility goals. See Sina Bahram, Consulting, https://www.sinabahram.com/consulting.php
(last visited Feb. 11, 2016).
As a visually-impaired individual himself and in his capacity as an advocate for other
disabled persons, Mr. Bahram has a substantial interest in this case, which is likely to have a
profound effect on the ability of persons with disabilities to access, understand, and participate in
the development of the law. Disabled individuals like Mr. Bahram and those for whom he
advocates are acutely affected by changes in public safety or accessibility law—changes that
may, as in this case, incorporate standards crafted by standards development organizations
(“SDOs”). Defendant’s Statement of Material Facts (“DSMF”) ¶¶ 20, 21. When SDOs fail to
provide accessible versions of incorporated standards, they prevent millions of disabled
individuals from reading the laws that govern them. As an expert on, an advocate for, and a user
of accessibility technologies, Mr. Bahram is particularly well-positioned to explain these
problems and the potential impact of this case on disabled individuals.
This Court has allowed amicus curiae participation when the amicus “has unique
information or perspective that can help the court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties
are able to provide.” Jin v. Ministry of State Sec., 557 F. Supp. 2d 131, 137 (D.D.C. 2008)
(quoting Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n, 125 F.3d 1062, 1064 (7th Cir. 1997));
Cobell v. Norton, 246 F. Supp. 2d 59, 62 (D.D.C. 2003). Too often, policymakers overlook the
impact of the law upon disabled persons, and fail to consider their needs. Mr. Bahram’s unique
perspective as an advocate for and expert on accessibility technology will help the Court to

2

understand the implications of this case for an important and vulnerable segment of the
population.
The Parties have agreed that they will not oppose any amicus filing in support of either
side. See Joint Report on Proposed Summary Judgment Briefing Schedule at 3, Docket No. 58
(Oct. 30, 2015).

DATED: February 11, 2016

Respectfully Submitted,

Jeffrey T. Pearlman
CA Bar #254759
D.C. District Bar ID #CA00003
Phillip R. Malone (Admission Pending)
Juelsgaard IP And Innovation Clinic
Mills Legal Clinic at Stanford Law School
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

3