Microsoft Corporation v. United States Department of Justice et al

Filing 103

MINUTE ORDER REGARDING HEARING ON JANUARY 23, 2017 directing parties to be prepared to discuss the issue addressed in this order. The parties may, but are not required to, file a supplemental brief prior to oral argument on Monday, January 23, 2017. Authorized by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)

Case 2:16-cv-00538-JLR Document 103 Filed 01/19/17 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. C16-0538JLR
MINUTE ORDER REGARDING
HEARING ON JANUARY 23,
2017

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE,
Defendant.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable
James L. Robart:
The court has scheduled oral argument on Defendant United States Department of
Justice’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 38) for Monday, January 23, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. (see
Dkt.). In addition to other issues the court may raise at the hearing, the parties should be
prepared to address whether case law holding that Fourth Amendment rights are personal
rights that cannot be vicariously asserted bars Plaintiff Microsoft Corporation from

MINUTE ORDER - 1

Case 2:16-cv-00538-JLR Document 103 Filed 01/19/17 Page 2 of 2

1

pursuing its Fourth Amendment claim on behalf of its customers and how that case law is

2

to be reconciled with third-party standing doctrine. See, e.g., Plumhoff v. Rickard,

3

--- U.S. ---, 134 S. Ct. 2012, 2022 (2014) (stating in a Section 1983 excessive force case

4

that “[o]ur cases make it clear that Fourth Amendment rights are personal

5

rights . . . which may not be vicariously asserted” (internal quotation marks omitted));

6

Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 140 (1978) (noting the Supreme Court’s “long history of

7

insistence that Fourth Amendment rights are personal in nature”); Cal. Bankers Ass’n v.

8

Shultz, 416 U.S. 21, 69 (1974) (stating in dicta that the Court did not “think that the

9

California Bankers Association or the Security National Bank [could] vicariously assert

10

such Fourth Amendment claims on behalf of bank customers in general”); Ellwest Stereo

11

Theatres, Inc. v. Wenner, 681 F.2d 1243, 1248 (9th Cir. 1982) (“Ellwest has no standing

12

to assert the fourth amendment [privacy] rights of its customers.”); Powers v. Ohio, 499

13

U.S. 400, 410-11 (1991) (discussing three-part test for establishing third-party standing).

14

The parties should also be prepared at oral argument to identify the specific case

15

law or other authority on which they rely. The parties may, but are not required to, file a

16

supplemental brief on this issue prior to oral argument on Monday, January 23, 2017.

17

The length of any such supplemental brief is limited to five (5) pages.

18

Filed and entered this 19th day of January, 2017.

19

WILLIAM M. MCCOOL
Clerk of Court

20

s/ Ashleigh Drecktrah
Deputy Clerk

21
22

MINUTE ORDER - 2