`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
`THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
`
`
`
`
`
`KALSHIEX LLC,
`Appellee/Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`No. 24-5205
`(Appeal from Case No. 1:23-cv-03257)
`
`COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
`COMMISSION,
`
`
`Appellant/Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`APPELLANT CFTC’S MOTION FOR EXPEDITED SCHEDULE
`Pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 2 and 27, and this Court’s
`
`Rule 27, appellant Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or
`
`“Commission”) requests that this Court enter an expedited schedule for briefing,
`
`argument, and consideration of the issues on appeal. In support of this motion, the
`
`CFTC states as follows:
`
`The CFTC is appealing the district court’s order granting the appellee
`
`KalshiEx LLC’s (“Kalshi”) motion for summary judgment and denying the
`
`CFTC’s motion for summary judgment. The underlying dispute in this case relates
`
`to a Commission order that determined that certain election event contracts
`
`“involve” “gaming” and “activity unlawful under … State law,” and prohibited
`
`
`
`USCA Case #24-5205 Document #2078007 Filed: 10/02/2024 Page 2 of 6
`
`their listing and trading as contrary to public interest, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 7a-2.
`
`The contracts entail betting on the outcome of U.S. Congressional and Senate
`
`elections. Kalshi’s lawsuit challenged the Commission’s statutory interpretations
`
`and public interest determination under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
`
`§ 706(2)(A), (C).
`
`On September 12, 2024, the CFTC filed with this Court an Emergency
`
`Motion for Stay Pending Appeal and Immediate Interim Relief (“Motion for
`
`Stay”), seeking to stay the district court’s judgment so that trading in the election
`
`contracts would not commence during the pendency of the appeal. On October 2,
`
`2024, this Court denied the CFTC’s motion without prejudice.
`
`When this Court disposes of a motion for stay pending appeal, it may
`
`expedite the case to minimize the possible harm to the parties or the public. D.C.
`
`CIRCUIT HANDBOOK OF PRACTICE AND INTERNAL PROCEDURES 34 (2021). This
`
`Court may also expedite cases in which the public generally, or in which persons
`
`not before the Court, have an unusual interest in prompt disposition. Id.
`
`The public’s interest lies with prompt disposition of this appeal. As the
`
`Commission indicated in its Motion for Stay, the election contracts are susceptible
`
`to market manipulation. The Commission reasonably expects that the contracts
`
`pose a risk to election integrity or perceptions of election integrity, which would
`
`put the CFTC in the position of investigating such activities in election markets,
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`USCA Case #24-5205 Document #2078007 Filed: 10/02/2024 Page 3 of 6
`
`well outside of its traditional areas of responsibility. In addition, the Commission
`
`received hundreds of public comments expressing deep concern that election
`
`gambling impacts the integrity of United States elections, thus substantiating the
`
`Commission’s fear that large-scale betting on elections will undermine public
`
`confidence in our democratic system. Finally, the Commission has proposed a
`
`regulation on event contracts that may be substantially impacted by this Court’s
`
`decision on the merits.*
`
`This Court has recognized that this case presents a “question on the merits
`
`[that] is close and difficult.” Oct. 2, 2024 Opinion at 8. Prompt consideration by
`
`this Court will provide clarity to the parties, other market participants, and the
`
`public on the legality of election gambling on federally regulated exchanges.
`
`For these reasons, the CFTC respectfully requests that the Court consider
`
`this appeal on an expedited schedule and enter the following briefing schedule:
`
`Brief for Appellant CFTC and Joint Appendix due: October 16, 2024
`
`Brief for Appellee Kalshi due: November 6, 2024
`
`Reply Brief for Appellant CFTC due: November 22, 2024
`
`Oral Argument: Week of December 2, 2024
`
`
`* CFTC Issues Proposal on Event Contracts, CFTC (May 10, 2024),
`https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8907-24.
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`USCA Case #24-5205 Document #2078007 Filed: 10/02/2024 Page 4 of 6
`
`On October 2, 2024, counsel for the CFTC contacted counsel for Kalshi to
`
`ascertain whether Kalshi will agree to the proposed expedited schedule. Kalshi’s
`
`counsel indicated that Kalshi will oppose this motion.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the CFTC respectfully requests that the Court
`
`grant the Commission’s Motion for Expedited Schedule.
`
`
`Dated: October 2, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Respectfully submitted,
`/s/ Raagnee Beri
`Raagnee Beri
` Senior Assistant General Counsel
`
`Robert A. Schwartz
` General Counsel
`Anne W. Stukes
` Deputy General Counsel
`Margaret P. Aisenbrey
` Senior Assistant General Counsel
` Conor B. Daly
` Counsel
`Commodity Futures Trading
`Commission 1155 21st Street, NW
`Washington, D.C. 20581-0001
`Phone: (202) 418-5986
`rberi@cftc.gov
`
`4
`
`
`
`USCA Case #24-5205 Document #2078007 Filed: 10/02/2024 Page 5 of 6
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`I hereby certify under Fed. R. App. P. 32(g)(1) the following:
`1. This document complies with the type-volume limit of Fed. R. App. P.
`27(d)(2)(A) because, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R.
`App. P. 32(f), it contains 581 words, as counted by the word processing
`software Microsoft Word.
`
`2. This document complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P.
`32(a)(5)-(6) because it has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface
`using Microsoft Word, in Times New Roman 14-point type.
`
`
`
`Dated: October 2, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Raagnee Beri
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`USCA Case #24-5205 Document #2078007 Filed: 10/02/2024 Page 6 of 6
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on October 2, 2024, I served the foregoing Motion for
`
`Expedited Schedule on counsel of record using this Court’s CM/ECF system.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Raagnee Beri
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site