Opinion
21-cv-05246-MMC
04-05-2024
ATHLETICS INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, Plaintiff, v. SCHNITZER STEEL INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICI CURIAE
MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge.
Before the Court is the "Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment" ("Motion for Leave"), filed March 29, 2024, by Communities for a Better Environment, San Francisco Baykeeper, and Natural Resources Defense Council's (collectively, "Proposed Amici"). Defendant Schnitzer Steel Industries, Inc. ("Schnitzer"), has filed opposition thereto. Having read and considered the Motion for Leave and the opposition, the Court rules as follows.
As Proposed Amici state, and as Schnitzer acknowledges, district courts have found it appropriate to consider "amicus briefs from non-parties concerning legal issues that have potential ramifications beyond the parties directly involved or if the amicus has unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties are able to provide." See NGV Gaming Ltd. v. Upstream Point Molate, LLC, 355 F.Supp.2d 1061, 1067 (N.D. Cal. 2005.)
Here, Proposed Amici represent that they have sought "adequate regulation of metal shredding facilities in California, particularly Schnitzer's," including by filing amicus briefs in state court proceedings seeking enforcement of "stricter waste management rules at metal shredders" (see Motion for Leave at 3:3-5), and that, as a non-profit agency, they have a unique perspective on the controversy between Schnitzer and plaintiff Athletic Investment Group, LLC's ("AIG"), each of which is a for-profit entity. The sole issue addressed in their proposed brief, however, is whether one of AIG's claims is, as Schnitzer asserts in its pending motion for summary judgment, barred by the statute of limitations and, in that regard, the position set forth by Proposed Amici is the same position taken by AIG in its opposition to Schnitzer's motion for summary judgment. See IO Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc., 2007 WL 2433385, at *1 (N.D. Cal. August 22, 2007) (denying non-party's motion for leave to appear as amici curiae for purposes of briefing "issues raised in summary judgment motion," where proposed brief did not provide "unique information or perspective").
Accordingly, the Motion for Leave is hereby DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.