No. 24A1105

Brad Greenspan v. Google, LLC, et al.

Lower Court: District of Columbia
Docketed: 2025-05-16
Status: Application
Type: A
Tags: crime-victims-rights-act due-process judicial-review mandamus petition statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference: N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the D.C. Circuit improperly dismissed a Crime Victims' Rights Act petition as moot without addressing the merits, in violation of statutory requirements for judicial review

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : TO THE HONORABLE SONIA SOTOMAYOR, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AND CIRCUIT JUSTICE FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT: Pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 13.5, 22, and 30, Petitioner respectfully request a 60-day extension of time, up to and including July 20, 2025, to file a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to review that court’s February 21, 2025 decision in USA v. Google, LLC #24-5006 (D.C. Circuit) (attached as Exhibit A). The petition will seek review of this judgment under Supreme Court Rule 12.4. The jurisdiction of this Court will be invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1), and the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari will expire without an extension on May 22, 2025. This application, is timely because it has been filed at least ten days prior to the date on which the time for filing the petition is to expire. 1. This case presents substantial and important questions of federal law: i. Whether the D.C. Circuit erred in dismissing Petitioner's Crime Victims' Rights Act petition as "moot" rather than addressing it on the merits as required by 18 U.S.C. § 83771(d)(8), which mandates that courts "shall take up and decide" such applications within 72 hours. ii. Whether the D.C. Circuit's misclassification of Petitioner's CVRA petition as an ordinary mandamus petition violated Petitioner's statutory rights under 18 U.S.C. § 3771? iii. Whether Plaintiffs Due Process has been violated as a result of not being reviewed by a Panel with a ruling on the merits. 2. Plaintiff is in the process of finalizing Supreme Court barred counsel and does not have an adequate amount of time to prepare an effective petition for writ of certiorari. A one-time extension of 60 days will allow Plaintiff to secure counsel and to prepare an effective petition. Accordingly, the petitioner respectfully requests an order be entered extending the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari for 60 days, up to and including July 20, 2025. Dated: May 12, 2025 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Brad Greenspan Brad Greenspan Pro Se Plaintiff 244 5th Ave, Suite #G290 New York, NY 10001

Docket Entries

2025-10-23
Petition of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-09-25
Corrected Petition of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-09-23
Petition of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-09-23
Appendix of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-09-23
Certificate of Compliance of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-07-22
Certificate of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-07-21
Petition of Brad Greenspan submitted.
2025-05-19
Application (24A1105) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until July 21, 2025.
2025-05-12
Application (24A1105) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 22, 2025 to July 21, 2025, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

Brad Greenspan
Brad Greenspan — Petitioner
Brad Greenspan — Petitioner
David P. Reiner IIReiner & Reiner, P.A., Petitioner
David P. Reiner IIReiner & Reiner, P.A., Petitioner
Federal Party
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent