Case 4:14-cv-04480-YGR Document 94 Filed 01/15/16 Page 1 of 31 BENJAMIN C. MIZER 1 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 2 BRIAN STRETCH Acting United States Attorney 3 ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Deputy Branch Director 4 STEVEN Y. BRESSLER 5 Senior Trial Counsel JULIA A. BERMAN 6 Trial Attorney 7 United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 8 P.O. Box 883 9 Washington, D.C. 20044 10 Telephone: (202) 616-8480 Facsimile: (202) 616-8470 11 Email: [email protected] 12 Attorneys for Defendants the Attorney General, et al. 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 __________________________________________ ) 16 TWITTER, INC., ) Case No. 14-cv-4480 ) 17 Plaintiff, ) Date: March 15, 2016 18 ) Time: 2:00 p.m. v. ) Courtroom 1, Fourth Floor 19 ) Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers LORETTA E. LYNCH, United States ) 20 Attorney General, et al., ) DEFENDANTS’ 21 ) MOTION TO DISMISS THE Defendants. ) AMENDED COMPLAINT 22 __________________________________________) 23 24 25 26 27 28 Twitter, Inc. v. Lynch, et al., Case No. 14-cv-4480 Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint Case 4:14-cv-04480-YGR Document 94 Filed 01/15/16 Page 2 of 31 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE 3 NOTICE OF MOTION ....................................................................................................... 1 4 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES ..................................................... 1 5 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ......................................................................................... 1 6 7 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 4 8 A. Statutory and Regulatory Background .....................................................................4 9 1. FISA .............................................................................................................4 10 2. The Espionage Act .......................................................................................6 11 12 B. Factual Background .................................................................................................6 13 ARGUMENT ..................................................................................................................... 10 14 I. This Court Should Dismiss Counts I and II in the Interest of Comity 15 With the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ........................................................ 10 16 II. Plaintiff Has Failed to Establish its Standing to Bring the Espionage Act 17 Challenge in Count III of the Amended Complaint ...........................................................16 18 III. All of Plaintiff’s Claims Fail Because It is Lawful to Restrict Disclosure 19 of Classified Information Learned Through Participation in a Secret National Security Investigation ..........................................................................................19 20 21 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Twitter, Inc. v. Lynch, et al., Case No. 14-cv-4480 i Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint Case 4:14-cv-04480-YGR Document 94 Filed 01/15/16 Page 3 of 31 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 1 2 CASES PAGE(S) 3 Al Haramain Islamic Found., Inc. v. Dep’t of Treasury, 4 686 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2012) .................................................................................................... 21 5 In re All Matters Submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, 6 218 F. Supp. 2d 611 (F.I.S.C. 2002) .......................................................................................... 15 7 Am. States Ins. Co. v. Kearns, 8 15 F.3d 142 (9th Cir. 1994) ...................................................................................................... 11 9 Avila v. Willits Envtl. Remediation Trust, 633 F.3d 828 (9th Cir. 2011) .................................................................................................... 15 10 11 Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1990) .................................................................................................... 19 12 13 Bd. of Trustees of the State Univ. of NY v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469 (1989) .................................................................................................................. 14 14 Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 15 550 U.S. 544 (2007) .................................................................................................................. 19 16 Butterworth v. Smith, 17 494 U.S. 624 (1990) .................................................................................................................. 22 18 Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, 19 133 S. Ct. 1138 (2013) ........................................................................................................ 16, 17 20 DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332 (2006) .................................................................................................................. 16 21 22 Delson Group, Inc. v. GSM Ass’n, 570 F. App’x 690 (9th Cir. 2014) ....................................................................................... 12, 13 23 Dep’t of Navy v. Egan, 24 484 U.S. 518 (1998) ............................................................................................................ 20, 21 25 In re: Directives Pursuant to Section 105B of FISA, 26 551 F.3d 1004 (F.I.S.C.R. 2008)............................................................................................... 11 27 Doe v. Mukasey, 28 549 F.3d 861 (2d Cir. 2008)...................................................................................................... 22 Twitter, Inc. v. Lynch, et al., Case No. 14-cv-4480 ii Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint Case 4:14-cv-04480-YGR Document 94 Filed 01/15/16 Page 4 of 31 1 FDIC v. Aaronian, 2 93 F.3d 636 (9th Cir. 1996) ...................................................................................................... 12 3 First Am. Coalition v. Judicial Review Bd., 784 F.2d 467 (3d Cir. 1986)...................................................................................................... 22 4 5 In re All Matters Submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, 218 F. Supp. 2d 611 (F.I.S.C. 2002) ......................................................................................... 15 6 7 Global Relief Found., Inc. v. O’Neill, 315 F.3d 748 (7th Cir. 2002) .................................................................................................... 21 8 Gov’t Employees Ins. Co. v. Dizol, 9 133 F.3d 1220 (9th Cir. 1998) ............................................................................................ 10, 11 10 Haig v. Agee, 11 453 U.S. 280 (1981) .................................................................................................................. 21 12 Hernandez v. United States, 13 No. CV 14-00146, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116921 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2014) ........................ 12 14 Hoffmann-Pugh v. Keenan, 338 F.3d 1136 (10th Cir. 2003) ................................................................................................ 22 15 16 Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1 (2010) ...................................................................................................................... 19 17 Lapin v. Shulton, Inc., 18 333 F.2d 169 (9th Cir. 1964) .............................................................................................. 12, 13 19 Libertarian Party of Los Angeles County v. Bowen, 20 709 F.3d 867 (9th Cir. 2013) .................................................................................................... 17 21 Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 22 504 U.S. 555 (1992) .................................................................................................................. 16 23 McGehee v. Casey, 718 F.2d 1137 (D.C. Cir. 1983) .......................................................................................... 21, 23 24 25 Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010) .................................................................................................................. 16 26 27 NRDC v. EPA, 966 F.2d 1292 (9th Cir. 1992) .................................................................................................. 11 28 Twitter, Inc. v. Lynch, et al., Case No. 14-cv-4480 iii Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint Case 4:14-cv-04480-YGR Document 94 Filed 01/15/16 Page 5 of 31 In re NSA Telecom. Records Litig., 1 633 F. Supp. 2d 949 (N.D. Cal. 2009) ...................................................................................... 20 2 Nuclear Info. & Res. Serv. v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n, 3 457 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2006) .................................................................................................... 16 4 Ord v. United States, 5 8 F. App’x 852 (9th Cir. 2001) ................................................................................................. 12 6 Oregon v. Legal Servs. Corp., 7 552 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2009) .................................................................................................... 17 8 Principal Life Ins. Co. v. Robinson, 394 F.3d 665 (9th Cir. 2005) .................................................................................................... 11 9 10 Protectmarriage.com-Yes on 8 v. Bowen, 752 F.3d 827 (9th Cir. 2014) ........................................................................................