State of Hawaii v. Trump

Filing 222

MOTION re 217 Memorandum, [Motion for Leave to Include Additional Amici to Amici Curiae Technology Companies and Other Businesses' Amicus Brief] Margery S. Bronster appearing for Amicus Technology Companies and Other Businesses (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Bronster, Margery)

BRONSTER FUJICHAKU ROBBINS
A Law Corporation
MARGERY S. BRONSTER 4750
[e-mail]
MELINDA WEAVER
10464
[e-mail]
1003 Bishop Street, Suite 2300
Honolulu, HI 96813
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
ROBERT A. ATKINS (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
ANDREW J. EHRLICH (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
PIETRO J. SIGNORACCI (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Proposed Amici Curiae
Technology Companies and Other Businesses

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
STATE OF HAWAI‘I, et al.,

Case No. 1:17-cv-00050-DKW-KSC

Plaintiffs,

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
INCLUDE ADDITIONAL AMICI
TO AMICI CURIAE
TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES
AND OTHER BUSINESSES’
AMICUS BRIEF [DKT. NO. 217];
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

v.
DONALD J. TRUMP, President of
the United States, et al.,
Defendants.

Hearing
Date:
March 15, 2017
Time:
9:30 a.m.
Judge: Hon. Derrick K. Watson
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL AMICI
TO AMICI CURIAE TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES AND
OTHER BUSINESSES’ AMICUS BRIEF
Amici curiae Technology Companies and Other Businesses (“Tech
Cos.”) respectfully move this Court for leave to include additional amici
to its Brief of Amici Curiae Technology Companies and Other Businesses
in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order;
Appendix “A” filed March 15, 2017 [Dkt. No. 217] (“Brief of Amicus
Curiae”), specifically:

2

59.

Affirm, Inc.

60.

Ancestry.com, LLC

61.

AppDynamics, Inc.

62.

Codecademy

63.

Knotel

64.

Squarespace, Inc.

65.

Thumbtack, Inc.

66.

Uber Technologies, Inc.1

67.

Via

The above companies’ interest in this case is comparable to that of
the current Tech Cos.’ amici. However, given the volume of participants
interested in joining the brief, some administrative hurdles prevented
the inclusion of these nine companies at the time of filing. Now having
cleared these checks, these companies respectfully request to be
included in the Tech Cos.’ Brief of Amicus Curiae.

1Bronster

Fujichaku Robbins does not represent Uber Technologies, Inc.
3

The undersigned represent that Plaintiffs consent to the filing of
this motion and that Defendants take no position with regard to this
motion.
The addition of these companies does not change the substance of
the Brief of Amicus Curiae. If this motion is granted, corporate
disclosures will be filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 shortly
thereafter. For the reasons stated above, Amici Tech Cos. respectfully
request this Court grant their motion for leave to add these nine
businesses to their Brief of Amicus Curiae.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, March 15, 2017.
/s/ Margery S. Bronster
MARGERY S. BRONSTER
MELINDA WEAVER
ROBERT A. ATKINS*
ANDREW J. EHRLICH*
PIETRO J. SIGNORACCI*
Attorneys for Proposed Amici Curiae
Technology Companies and
Other Businesses
*Pro hac vice

4