Libertarian Party of Ohio v. Jon Husted, 497 F. App'x 581

LPO amended complaint against Ohio Secretary of State challenging HB 194 as unconstitutionally restricting ballot access.
HB 194 amended Ohio law to require minor parties to gather signatures equal to 1% of last election votes, with timing prior to May primary.
District court granted preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of HB 194, allowing LPO access to 2011 and 2012 ballots.
Referendum petition led to suspension of HB 194 pending voter approval; OGA repealed HB 194 in May 2012, effective August 2012.
On appeal, the parties argued mootness since HB 194 was suspended and later repealed; court must address mootness before jurisdiction.
Court vacates district court judgment and remands to dismiss the underlying litigation as moot; leaves attorney’s fees to district court decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is the case moot due to repeal and suspension of HB 194?	LPO contends ongoing relief viable; challenges remained live.	Mootness due to repeal/suspension eliminates live controversy.	Case is moot; vacate and dismiss the underlying litigation.
Should the court remand with dismissal and address attorney’s fees later?	LPO may seek fees if eligible under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b).	Fees are not addressed on moot appeal; reconsideration deferred.	Remand with dismissal; fee determination reserved to district court.

Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43 (1997) (Mootness and remedy principles in constitutional challenges)
United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36 (1950) (Munsingwear doctrine—vacate and dismiss when case becomes moot)
Kentucky Right to Life, Inc. v. Terry, 108 F.3d 637 (6th Cir. 1997) (mootness when statute repealed; remand for dismissal)
Ohio Citizen Action v. City of Englewood, 671 F.3d 564 (6th Cir. 2012) (mootness and standing considerations in appellate review)
North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244 (1971) (threshold mootness requirement for federal jurisdiction)