Texas District Court Tosses Suit on Regulation of 3D-Printed Gun Files for Lack of Jurisdiction
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas dismissed a suit against the State Department concerning the regulation of 3D gun file exports, saying the claims are moot because the State Department shifted export control responsibility to the Commerce Department. Judge Robert Pitman dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, saying plaintiffs Defense Distributed and Second Amendment Foundation failed to show the State Department still regulated the exports. Pitman also ruled that Defense Distributed's claim for monetary damages against the State Department belongs "to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims."
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The case stems from Defense Distributed's release of computer files in 2012 that let 3D printer users make operable plastic firearms or parts. The State Department in 2013 told the company it may have violated the International Traffic in Arms Regulations by releasing the files, and Defense Distributed removed the technical data and submitted a commodity jurisdiction request to the agency to determine whether they were subject to ITAR controls.
The State Department eventually said some of the files were subject to the ITAR and others weren't, the court said. The two sides eventually reached a settlement agreement in which the State Department "temporarily" modified the U.S. Munitions List to "exclude the 3-D-gun files at issue" and sent a letter to Defense Distributed "approving the 3-D-gun files for public release."
Then, in 2020, Defense Distributed asked the court to issue a preliminary injunction to prevent the State Department from regulating exports of 3D gun files. But before the government could make a ruling, the State Department "filed a notice of suggestion of mootness," the court said, since the export control authority over 3D printed guns had recently been transferred from the State Department to Commerce (see 2105270088).
Defense Distributed and Second Amendment Foundation said an exception to mootness existed under the voluntary cessation test, which accuses the defense of "litigation posturing." The company said a defendant can't moot a case simply by ending its illegal conduct once sued. Pitman rejected that test, saying the State Department's move to transfer the export authority to Commerce was not a "response to litigation."