S.D.N.Y.

12-cv-1543
Nathan, J .

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE
SECOND CIRCUIT
___________________

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square,
in the City of New York, on the 6
th
day of August, two thousand fourteen.

Present:
Denny Chin,
Christopher F. Droney,
Circuit Judges,
J ohn Gleeson,
District Judge.
*


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WNET, Thirteen, Fox Television Stations, Inc.,
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation,
WPIX, Inc., Univision Television Group, Inc.,
The Univision Network Limited Partnership,
and Public Broadcasting Service,

Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellants,
AMENDED ORDER
v. 12-2786-cv

Aereo, Inc., F/K/A Bamboom Labs, Inc.,

Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., Disney
Enterprises, Inc., CBS Broadcasting Inc., CBS
Studios Inc., NBCUniversal Media, LLC,

*
The Honorable J ohn Gleeson, United States District Court for the Eastern District of
New York, sitting by designation.
MANDATE
MANDATE ISSUED ON 08/21/2014
Case: 12-2807 Document: 298 Page: 1 08/21/2014 1300491 2
12-cv-1540



USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #: _________________
DATE FILED: ______________
August 21, 2014
Case 1:12-cv-01540-AJN-HBP Document 324 Filed 08/21/14 Page 1 of 2
NBCStudios, LLC, Universal Network
Television, LLC, Telemundo Network Group LLC, and
WNJ U-TV Broadcasting LLC,

Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellants,
v. 12-2807-cv

Aereo, Inc.,

Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On April 1, 2013, we affirmed the district court's order of J uly 11, 2012, denying Plaintiffs'
motion for a preliminary injunction. On J une 25, 2014, the Supreme Court reversed and
remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. In accordance with the
instructions of the Supreme Court, we therefore now VACATE the district court's order denying
the preliminary injunction and REMAND the case for further proceedings.

By letter dated J uly 24, 2014, appellee Aereo, Inc. seeks "further consideration of the
preliminary injunction issues in this case by this Court," specifically, whether Aereo is a "cable
system" entitled to a statutory license. The request is denied. We leave it to the district court to
consider whether the issues are properly raised in these cases and, if so, to rule on the issues in
the first instance.

FOR THE COURT:
Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

Case: 12-2807 Document: 298 Page: 2 08/21/2014 1300491 2 Case 1:12-cv-01540-AJN-HBP Document 324 Filed 08/21/14 Page 2 of 2