I'm not sure that's correct. From what I read in this thread, "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta agreed with the lower court, saying Wood had failed “to allege a particularized injury” and the request was moot anyway since Georgia had already certified the election."
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3912538/posts
Wood’s lawsuit failed to demonstrate standing and it was to stop the certification. He did not show standing (his best claim) and it was a moot point because the state certified.
From what I have read and heard from lawyers we know and trust, it was expected that the suit would not prevail on appeal and the 11th Circuit decision is unlikely to be reviewed by SCOTUS.
Matt is doing some great work. He says he has found far more invalid votes than are needed to change the result. Time is not our friend though nor is the Sec. of State and the Georgia legislature is not helping either.
RE: the request was moot anyway since Georgia had already certified the election.”
OK, what’s stopping the courts from using this same reasoning in Matt Braynard’s case?