Earlier today, the appellants in Thomas More Law Center v. Obama filed their response at the Sixth Circuit to the United States's motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. The appellants also filed two declarations in support of their opposition to dismiss--one from plaintiff John Ceci and one from plaintiff Steven Hyder.
The essence of the appellants' argument is that whether the plaintiffs have health coverage currently is irrelevant to whether they have an injury in fact for purposes of Article III. Because regardless of their current status (as insured or uninsured), they face the looming requirement of having to maintain minimally adequate health coverage every month beginning in January 2014, and this has current financial consequences. (One possible problem with this argument is that, taken to its logical conclusion, it seems to mean that everyone in the United States has standing to challenge the individual mandate, save those persons who know with reasonable certainty that they will be exempt from the requirement come 2014.)
You can find the appellants' response in opposition to the motion to dismiss here.
You can find the Ceci declaration here.
And you can find the Hyder declaration here.