Then there's, Philip Berg (whom the court really, really wanted to sanction as one of "the people who put Mr. Hemenway up to filing this foolish suit"), but couldn't, since "Messrs. Berg and Joyce are not members of the bar of this court and were not granted leave to appear pro hac vice."
So, Berg seizes the opportunity to direct the court's attention to Barnett v. Obama, while throwing mud at Orly Taitz (who may be quite deserving, but not in an Amicus Curiae brief, Phil).
And then there's some argument about "mootness," "even though the Court in Barnett did not specifically face an issue of mootness" because "the issue of mootness could arise in this case---academically, at least..."