After former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows’ lawsuit challenging the validity of a pair of subpoenas served to him by the Jan. 6 House committee was thrown out last month, he asked a federal judge to do two things: reconsider his decision, and also stay the ruling while he reconsiders. On Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols ruled on the latter motion, essentially telling Meadows in legal politesse: “Better luck next time, bud.” In a three-page order, Nichols wrote that a stay was “unwarranted,” as Meadows “has not shown that a stay will provide him any meaningful relief.” In particular, Nichols determined that, in Meadows’ case, “there is nothing to stay in order to maintain the status quo”—the possibility of “judicial alteration of the status quo” being a necessary precondition for a stay to be granted. Nichols has yet to rule on Meadows’ motion for reconsideration, which he wrote Thursday was coming “in due course.” Nichols previously tossed Meadows’ suit, ruling that the House panel’s actions were protected by a constitutional “speech or debate” cause.