No. In the Supreme Court of the Anited States DANIEL E. HALL, PETITIONER v. TWITTER, INC., RESPONDENT ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ATTACHED APPENDIX I- COURT ORDERS Daniel E. Hall Petitioner, Pro Se ‘Aka, Sensa Verogna 393 Merrimack Street Manchester, N.H. 03103 [email protected] September 15, 2024Case: 23-1555 Document: 00118149420 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/28/2024 Entry ID: 6645011 United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 23-1555 DANIEL E. HALL, a/k/a Sensa Verogna, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TWITTER, INC, Defendant - Appellee. Before Kayatta, Gelpi and Montecalvo, Circuit Judges. JUDGMENT Entered: May 28, 2024 Plaintiff appeals the dismissal of his complaint against Twitter, Inc. (now X Corp.). We have carefully considered the filings of the parties and the district court record. Plaintiff's multiple motions to take judicial notice are resolved as follows: we have reviewed the submitted documents and have taken judicial notice of any proffered materials to the extent they are relevant and appropriate for consideration for purposes of this appeal. We review the dismissal of plaintiff's complaint de novo. See, ¢.g., Cardigan Mountain ‘Sch. v. New Hampshire Ins. Co., 787 F.3d 82, 84 (Ist Cir. 2015). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. Igbal, 556 U.S, 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, $50 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) ("[flactual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ..."). After thorough review, we agree with the district court that plaintiff failed to plead facts sufficient to make out a plausible claim that Twitter suspended his account on the basis of race or that Twitter is a state actor for constitutional purposes under the circumstances of this case. See Doe v. Brown Univ. 43 F.4th 195, 208 (Ist Cir. 2022) (explaining that a § 1981 claim requires PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT ACase: 23-1555 Document: 00118149420 Page:2 Date Filed: 05/28/2024 —_ Entry ID: 6645011 proof of an intent to discriminate on the basis of race); Manhattan Comm. Access Corp. v. Halleck, 587 U.S. 802 (2019) (explaining requirements for a private entity to be deemed a state actor). Plaintiff's other arguments are rejected as meritless. To the extent not mooted by the foregoing, all remaining motions are denied. See Ist Cir. L.R. 27.0(0). By the Court: Maria R. Hamilton, Clerk cc: Daniel E. Hall Demetrio F. Aspiras III Kenneth Michael Trujillo-Jamison David M. Lieberman PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT ACase: 23-1555 Document: 00118164744 Page:1 Date Filed: 07/10/2024 __Entry ID: 6653555 United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 23-1555 DANIEL E. HALL, a/k/a Sensa Verogna, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TWITTER, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Before Barron, Chief Judge, Kayatta, Gelpi, Montecalvo Rikelman and Aframe’, Circuit Judges. ORDER OF COURT Entered: July 10, 2024 ‘The petition for rehearing having been denied by the panel of judges who decided the case and the petition for rehearing en banc having been submitted to the active judges of this court and a majority of the judges not having voted that the case be heard en banc, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc be denied. By the Court Maria R. Hamilton, Clerk E. Hall, Demetrio F. Aspiras III, Kenneth Michael Tryjillo-Jamison, David M. Lieberman * Judge Aframe is recused and did not participate in the determination of this matter. PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT BCase 1:20-cv-00536-SE Document 139 Filed 05/09/23 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Daniel E. Hall ve Case No. 20-cv-536-SE Opinion No. 2023 DNH 054 ORDER Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U prohibits discrimination on the basis of race. But it does not protect against discrimination based on a person’s politica beliefs, even when those political beliefs are purportedly favored by a particular race. At bottom, that is what plaintiff Daniel Hall's complaint alleges: that defendant Twitter, Inc suspended his account because of his conservative viewpoints, and that Twitter’s action constitutes racial discrimination because he and the majority of conservatives are white. Case law directly contradicts that theory and, as such, Hall’s § 1981 claim fails. So, too, do his other theories of liability against Twitter and the court therefore grants Twitter’s motion t dismiss. Doc. no. 3. Standard of Review “To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT CCase 1:20-cv-00536-SE Document 139 Filed 05/09/23 Page 2 of 13 relief that is plausible on its face.”! Ashcroft v. Igbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quotation omitted). Under this plausibility standard, the plaintiff must plead “factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. This pleading requirement demands “more than 2 sheer possibility that {the} defendant has acted unlawfully,” or “facts that are merely consistent with [the] defendant’s liability.” Id. (quotation omitted). Although the complaint need not set forth detailed factual allegations, it must provide “more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Id. In deciding a motion to dismiss, the court takes the non- conclusory factual allegations in the complaint as true and resolves reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party Doe _v. Stonehill College, Inc., 55 F.4th 302, 316 (Ist Cir 2022). The court “may also consider facts subject to judicial notice, implications from documents incorporated into the complaint, and concessions in the complainant's response to the motion to dismiss.” Breiding v. Eversource Energy, 939 F.3d 47 1 Hall’s complaint is 57 pages long and is accompanied by 429 pages of exhibits. Although a motion to dismiss is ordinarily based on the properly pleaded allegations in the complaint, exhibits attached to the complaint are considered part of the complaint for the purposes of a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) (6). Trans-Spec Truck Serv., Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc., 524 F.3d 315, 321 (ist Cir 2008). PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT CCase 1:20-cv-00536-SE Document 139 Filed 05/09/23 Page 3 of 13 49 (1st Cir. 2019) (quotation omitted). When the plaintiff is a pro se litigant, the court construes his complaint liberally. Boivin Black, 225 F. 3d 36, 43 (1st Cir. 2000). Background Hall's relationship with Twitter began in March 2019 when he signed a Twitter user agreement for services through the website Twitter.com, under the pseudonym “Senza Vergogna."? Hall alleges that on December 5, 2019, Twitter banned him from using many of the services offered at Twitter.com. He states that he is still able to log into his Twitter.com account, @Basta_Lies, but his cover photograph is blocked out and his posted materials and followers are missing. Hall has learned that his account does not exist except to him. The problems between Hall and Twitter began with a Tweet he posted in late 2019: If I had special powers I would reach through that video and Bitch slap that commie Bitch who is yelling like a 3-year old! ? In the exhibits submitted with his complaint, Hall's pseudonym is “Senza Vergogna” and his Twitter account is identified as “Senza Vergogna @ Basta_Lies.” Hall identified himself as “Sensa Verogna” in his complaint filed in this case and in subsequent filings. The correct spelling of Hall’s pseudonym is not material, however, because the court denied Hall's request to proceed under his pseudonym. Doc. no. 54. PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT CCase 1:20-cv-00536-SE Document 139 Filed 05/09/23 Page 4 of 13 Doc. no. 1, #1 18(a). In response, Twitter locked Hall’s account on November 7, 2019, for seven days for violating Twitter's rules against hateful conduct and stated that: You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease. Id. Twitter notified Hall “that repeated violations may lead to a permanent suspension of [his] account.” Doc. no. 1-2 at 72 Undeterred by Twitter’s warning, Hall posted a Tweet apparently aimed at a woman who was the subject of a Washington Post article about how President Trump had belittled her. Doc. no. 1-2 at 74. Hall wrote: Ya, let’s all get all cutesy with a fken #Traitor who should be hung if found guilty Doc. no. 1, {| 18(b). On December 5, 2019, Twitter permanently suspended Hall's account because he violated Twitter’s rules against abuse and harassment and provided the following notice You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. This includes wishing or hoping that someone experiences physical harm. Doc. no. 1-2 at 73. Twitter also notified Hall that “if you attempt to evade a permanent suspension by creating new accounts, we will suspend your new accounts.” Id. PETITIONER HALL'S EXHIBIT C