12 Percent Logistics, Inc. v. Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
Civil Action No. 2017-2000
| D.D.C. | Oct 18, 2017Background
- Board postponed the UCR registration start from Oct 1 to Nov 1 to buy time for a Secretary action on a rate proposal.
- Public notice failed to publish meeting information in the Federal Register as required by the Sunshine Act.
- Board emailed past attendees with meeting details, but did not provide formal Federal Register notice.
- Indiana Department of Revenue delayed the registration start in reliance on the Board's postponement.
- Plaintiffs filed suit seeking TRO/preliminary injunction to revert timing and to prevent future Sunshine Act violations.
- Court granted partial relief: disclose draft minutes/transcripts; denied injunction against INDOR.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sunshine Act notice adequacy | Plaintiffs allege failure to publish notice violated the Sunshine Act. | Board contends notice substantially complied via email to interested parties. | Plaintiffs likely proved Sunshine Act violation; but relief limited to disclosure, not vacating action. |
| Appropriate remedy under Sunshine Act | Relief should void or delay the Board's action and deter future violations. | Remedies should be limited to disclosure of meeting records; not invalidation of action. | Remedy limited to disclosure of draft minutes/transcripts; no injunction against future violations. |
| Authority to vacate Board action under Sunshine Act | Subsection (h)(2) may permit broader relief, including invalidating action. | No applicable law to allow vacating the Board's action under (h)(2). | Court lacked jurisdiction under (h)(2) to vacate the action; relief under (h)(1) only. |
| Personal jurisdiction over INDOR | INDOR transacts business via an online portal affecting DC registrants; thus PJ exists. | Website use is insufficient to establish substantial DC contacts; registry shows DC non-participating state. | Plaintiffs failed to establish likely personal jurisdiction over INDOR; injunctive relief against INDOR denied. |
| Irreparable harm to plaintiffs | Delay in registration harms registrants and road-safety funding; irreparable harm imminent. | Harm is speculative and insufficient for irreparable injury. | Irreparable harm not established; favored relief limited to records disclosure against the Board. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 684 F.2d 31 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (transcripts/minutes release preferred; vacating action rare)
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (S. Ct. 2008) (four-factor test for preliminary injunctions)
- GTE New Media Servs. Inc. v. BellSouth Corp., 199 F.3d 1343 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (specific jurisdiction aligns with due process)
- Triple Up Ltd. v. Youku Tudou, Inc., 235 F. Supp. 3d 15 (D.D.C. 2017) (website contacts and jurisdiction in internet context)
- Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England, 454 F.3d 290 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (irreparable harm and preliminary relief considerations)