BREAKING: On Monday evening, the Department of Justice moved to dismiss another appeal of its district court losses relating to DOJ’s transgender care administrative subpoenas.

DOJ had been appealing a district court decision quashing the subpoena that had been issued to the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center seeking invasive patient information, among other records.

The appeal was at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and DOJ's opening brief was due by the end of the day Monday.

This is the second time DOJ dismissed a Third Circuit appeal relating to one of these administrative subpoenas. The first of those was the appeal as to Children’s Hospital of Pennsylvania. That dismissal happened around the same time that the Justice Department — out of the Northern District of Texas — began issuing grand jury subpoenas seeking similar records.

At least two cases challenging aspects of that move have also resulted in district court rulings — in New York and California — protecting patients’ records from being turned over to DOJ.

This is, then, limited information. It was not immediately clear what would be happening next regarding UPMC or DOJ’s efforts relating to the hospital beyond the fact that DOJ will not be seeking to overturn the order quashing the administrative subpoena’s request for patient records.

The lawyers for the hospital’s patients, who brought the challenge, noted both the success of the litigation — and the future unknowns.

“The children we represented, their families, and all minor patients from UPMC’s gender-affirming care clinic can now rest easy that their personal information will not be exposed to a hostile administration,” Mimi McKenzie, legal director of the Public Interest Law Center, said in a statement provided to Law Dork. “That’s a win for patients. But it came with a great cost. They faced the possibility of harassment from the federal government and the fear that their private healthcare records would be in the hands of people who think that transgender and nonbinary people shouldn’t exist.”

McKenzie warned, however, that DOJ “has been reaching agreements with healthcare providers to end gender-affirming care and prop up ‘de-transition’ clinics, at a cost of hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars,“ adding, “Gender-affirming care is legal in Pennsylvania, and gender-based discrimination is not. UPMC must follow the law and not cave to a hostile administration.”