See if you can plot this one out for your issue-spotter.

Texas company files suit in Texas federal court against the state of New Jersey because New Jersey has a law against distributing blueprints for 3D printing guns in the state of New Jersey. Trial court in Texas dismisses the case based on the complete absence of even a colorable claim of jurisdiction.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-top-300x250" ); });

To set the table a bit, the Texas company is Defense Distributed, an entity founded by former law student Cody Wilson to publish instructions for 3D printing guns that allow users to circumvent gun regulations like background checks and licensing. Wilson was charged with sexual assault of a minor back in 2019, and then fled the country and had to be extradited, but he pleaded guilty and paid a fine and signed on for some classes and community service so he went right back to running his business!

Sponsored Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law — The Journal: Transactions & Business Explore decentralized finance, ESG-driven divestments, supply chain disruptions, and much more with the help of Practical Law’s over 300 attorney editors.   From Above the Law and Thomson Reuters

Anyway, back to this fact pattern (by the way, Alison Frankel has a more straightforward rundown of these shenanigans… check it out for additional details). The Texas district court has dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

This really pissed off the Fifth Circuit, who was so hopped up to strike down gun laws no matter what the Second Amendment might actually or historically say (this was 2020… so at the time there was still some shred of its prior two centuries of historical interpretation intact) that they reversed the trial court and sent it back.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-middle-300x250" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-storycontent-440x100" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-in-story-youtube-1x1" ); });

But the Texas company had, in a tactical failure that could only befall people who think owning “tactical gear” makes you a tactician, joined a similar suit in New Jersey federal court. The Texas district court agreed with the state of New Jersey that even if the Fifth Circuit was making up new civil procedure to allow him jurisdiction, he didn’t have to take it when there was a case in the actual state at issue. So the Texas case got kicked and everything moved to Jersey because, fundamentally…

Sponsored Sponsored MyCase And LawPay — Better Together Why small and midsize firms win big in a blockbuster merger. From Above the Law Sponsored Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law — The Journal: Transactions & Business Explore decentralized finance, ESG-driven divestments, supply chain disruptions, and much more with the help of Practical Law’s over 300 attorney editors.   From Above the Law and Thomson Reuters Sponsored The View from Inside: How In-House Leaders Can Improve Department Dissatisfaction and Mitigate Attrition Here’s the bottom line: if you are a GC or in-house legal leader, more than half of your legal team should be considered a flight… From Axiom and Above The Law Sponsored From Equity Management to Liquidity: How Morgan Stanley at Work Is Supporting Top Law Firms Read on to learn how empowering your clients with equity solutions can set them and their employees up for success. From Stephanie Wilkins

Compounding the tactical screwups, the Texas company didn’t seek a stay and by the time the Fifth Circuit got the appeal, it was too late to seize the case back because even the Fifth Circuit couldn’t rewrite the law to insert itself as the intermediary between all other circuits and the Supreme Court.

But, lo, they did try. In a legal hissyfit, the Fifth Circuit had the audacity to ask the New Jersey court to give the case back anyway based on “the longstanding tradition of comity, both within and across the circuits, as repeatedly demonstrated by district courts nationwide.”

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-bottom-300x250" ); });

Invoking “comity” is… curious. From the Fifth Circuit’s perspective, since the specific claims filed in Texas pre-dated the consolidation in New Jersey, comity leans in favor of the first-filed action. And it’s true that respect for the “first-filed” action is one way the federal courts manifest comity.

But this mistakes the symptom for the disease… or whatever the more positive spin on that phrase might be. Respecting the court with the first action might best further comity, but it also might not. When set up against the prospect of TEXAS striking down NEW JERSEY laws, then “comity” flows right into Tony Soprano’s pool.

Sponsored Sponsored Looking For A Turnkey Solution To Move Your Law Firm To The Cloud? You can have fast, secure access to your files and applications from anywhere without having to learn anything new or purchase upgraded hardware. Here’s how. From Above the Law Sponsored From Equity Management to Liquidity: How Morgan Stanley at Work Is Supporting Top Law Firms Read on to learn how empowering your clients with equity solutions can set them and their employees up for success. From Stephanie Wilkins

As you might imagine, the federal court in New Jersey sitting atop a number of duplicative claims against the state of New Jersey over a New Jersey law considered the option of forcing New Jersey to litigate the same question in two different courts and… politely declined.

At this point, the Fifth Circuit finally figured out that this was over and admitted that the failure to stay the transfer ties its hands.

A more professional appellate court would do this with some judicial discretion and just admit that there’s no argument in either jurisdiction or basic respect for judicial resources in having a second, separate New Jersey challenge living in Texas.

The Fifth Circuit was not hunky-dory. Instead, the Circuit couldn’t let the case go without yet another swipe at the New Jersey judge for not sending the case back, claiming “[t]he refusal of the District of New Jersey to retransfer is unprecedented in that regard.” It’s not… by the way. Because as the Fifth Circuit also whines in that opinion, the New Jersey court denied plaintiffs the chance to “be heard in the court chosen by plaintiffs.”

Except, the plaintiffs sued in New Jersey too. The plaintiffs DID choose New Jersey. They aren’t being robbed of their chosen forum — as much as jurisdiction should have done so — they chose two fora and judicial economy leans in favor of leaving the case in New Jersey. Plaintiffs have a forum they willingly entered and it minimizes duplicative litigation. That’s not an unprecedented result.

But if you’re looking for any last minute stocking stuffers for the Fifth Circuit… we’ve got a suggestion.

(And, of course, that’s an affiliate link.)

‘Ghost gun’ group loses bid to restore Texas claims against N.J. official [Reuters]

Earlier: Former UT Law School Student Gun Nut Indicted On Multiple Counts Of Sexual Assault

Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Topics

Courts, Fifth Circuit, Guns / Firearms, Texas