Whether a county election board and county commissioners have standing to bring a breach of contract claim against a voting machine vendor for alleged defects in voting systems used during a general election

No question identified. : PETITIONER FULTON COUNTY’S APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Submitted To: The Honorable Samuel A. Alito, Associate Justice, Circuit Justice for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and including the State of Pennsylvania. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2101(c) and Supreme Court Rules 13.5 and 22, the Petitioners, the Board of Elections of Fulton County, Pennsylvania and the Fulton County Board of Commissioners (Fulton County), for good cause, respectfully submit this Application for an Extension of Time to File a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in the above-captioned case. The Petitioners are seeking review of the decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals concerning Petitioners’ breach of contract and constitutional claims against Respondent. (ATTACHMENT A, Opinion and Judgment of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Fulton County, et al. v. Dominion Voting Systems, et al., Case No. 24-2771, unreported __F App'x___; 2025 LX 146682 (CA 3, June 23, 2025)). The Third Circuit denied Petitioners’ petition for rehearing en banc on August 15, 2025. Petitioners’ writ of certiorari from the Third Circuit’s opinion and order is due on or before Thursday, November 13, 2025. Pursuant to the Rules of the Supreme Court, Rules 13.5 and 22, Petitioners are filing this application requesting an extension on or before a date 10 days prior to the date that their petition is due. JURISDICTION OF THE COURT This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1), which authorizes review of cases in the courts of appeals by writ of certiorari. SUMMARY OF THE CASE This case began as a breach of contract case in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania filed by the Petitioners, Fulton County, Fulton County Board of Elections, and then County Commissioners Stuart L. Ulsh and Randy H. Bunch (hereafter “Fulton County”), against Respondents, Dominion Voting Systems, Inc. and U.S. Dominion, Inc. The Petitioners’ basic breach of contract action was lodged by and between the Fulton County Board of Elections, the constitutionally delegated authority to conduct and operate elections in the State of Pennsylvania, and Dominion Voting Systems, Inc. and U.S. Dominion, Inc. (hereafter Dominion), an entity that provides the governmental function of the means for voting in national elections to the citizens of Pennsylvania. The Petitioners’ lawsuit demonstrated that there was a contract by and between Fulton County and Dominion for provision by the latter of voting machines and voting machine systems required by the State of Pennsylvania to be used in elections. The Petitioners alleged that Dominion breached the contract and also breached warranties for providing voting machine systems that did not perform as required or intended, and which malfunctioned, and/or were otherwise defective during and after the November 2020 General Election. Dominion filed a motion to dismiss in the District Court and a brief in support. The motion was filed under both Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) (lack of subject matter jurisdiction) and 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim). There, Dominion argued that only Fulton County, and not the Fulton County Board of Elections and the majority members of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners at the time (Stuart L. Ulsh and Randy H. Bunch), were a party to the contract. Dominion further argued that U.S. Dominion was not a party to the contract. Dominion moved for dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and for lack of standing with respect to the Board of Elections and Commissioners Ulsh and Bunch. Petitioners responded to Dominion’s motion. First, as to the failure to state a claim argument under Rule 12(b)(6), Fulton County argued that the basis of its breach of contract action was supported by the fact that it claim