University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
view search results
page permalink
Case Name Trijicon, Inc. v. Sebelius FA-DC-0007
Docket / Court 1:13-cv-01207-EGS ( D.D.C. )
State/Territory District of Columbia
Case Type(s) Speech and Religious Freedom
Special Collection Contraception Insurance Mandate
Case Summary
On August 5, 2013, a for-profit company filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of D.C. under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and the Administrative Procedure Act. The named plaintiffs were the company ... read more >
On August 5, 2013, a for-profit company filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of D.C. under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and the Administrative Procedure Act. The named plaintiffs were the company and its shareholders and the defendants were the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Treasury, and the U.S. Department of Labor. Represented by a public interest firm, the plaintiff asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief in the form of an exception to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandate requiring employers to provide health insurance coverage of contraception. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that providing insurance coverage of contraception would violate the religious beliefs of the corporation's owners.

On August 14, 2013, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan granted the plaintiff's unopposed motion for preliminary injunction and stayed case. The court ordered the defendant not to enforce the ACA insurance mandate regarding contraception against the plaintiff until 30 days after the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in Gilardi v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services , which involved similar legal issues and the same defendant as this case. Gilardi was held while the Supreme Court decided Burwell v. Hobby Lobby. On June 30, 2014, the court held that the HHS regulations imposing the contraceptive mandate violated RFRA when applied to closely-held for-profit corporations.

Following this ruling, the district court reviewed recommendations for further proceedings that the parties submitted. On October 8, 2014, the court noted that while the parties agreed that the plaintiff was entitled to a permanent injunction following Hobby Lobby, they disagreed over the scope of that injunction. The court instructed the parties to file supplemental memorandum detailing the injunction language they supported or objected to. The parties filed on October 29, 2014, but as of December 3, 2018, the court had not recorded an order.

Mallory Jones - 10/09/2013
Richard Jolly - 04/05/2014
Kate Craddock - 07/31/2016
Dawn Lui - 12/03/2018


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Establishment Clause
Free Exercise Clause
Freedom of speech/association
Content of Injunction
Preliminary relief granted
Discrimination-area
Pay / Benefits
Discrimination-basis
Religion discrimination
General
Abortion
Contraception
Religious programs / policies
Plaintiff Type
Closely-held (for profit) corporation
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Non-government for profit
Causes of Action Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. ยงยง 551 et seq.
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Religious Freedom Rest. Act/Religious Land Use and Inst. Persons Act (RFRA/RLUIPA)
Defendant(s) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
U.S. Department of Labor
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Plaintiff Description A for-profit company seeking exemption from the ACA's contraception mandate.
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief Litigation
Filing Year 2013
Case Ongoing Yes
Case Listing FA-DC-0004 : Gilardi v. Dep't of Health and Human Services [Gilardi v. Sebelius] (D.D.C.)
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  See this case at CourtListener.com (May provide additional documents and, for active cases, real-time alerts)
Docket(s)
1:13-cv-1207 (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0007-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 04/05/2017
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint [ECF# 1]
FA-DC-0007-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/05/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
[Proposed] Order Granting Motion for Preliminary Injunction [ECF# 6-1]
FA-DC-0007-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/07/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [ECF# 19] (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0007-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/14/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
show all people docs
Judges Sullivan, Emmet G. (D.D.C.) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0002 | FA-DC-0007-0003 | FA-DC-0007-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Aden, Steven H. (Virginia) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001
Baylor, Gregory S. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001
Bowman, Matthew S. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001 | FA-DC-0007-9000
Cortman, David A. (Georgia) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001
Schowengerdt, Dale (Arizona) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001
Tedesco, Jeremy D. (Arizona) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001
Theriot, Kevin H. (Kansas) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-0001
Defendant's Lawyers Berwick, Benjamin Leon (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
FA-DC-0007-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
view search results
page permalink

- top of page -