Opinion
1:21-mc-640-GHW
09-06-2021
In re Application of Alberto Safra for an Order to Take Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782
ORDER
GREGORY H. WOODS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On August 31, 2021, Vicky Safra, as tire executor and administrator of die Estate of Joseph Yacoub Safra, moved to intervene in this case. Dkt. Nos. 18-19. On September 3, 2021, Petitioner filed a response to die motion and consented to Vicky Safia's intervention. Dkt. No. 22.
A district court
must grant an applicant's motion to intervene under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 24(a)(2) if (1) die motion is timely; (2) die applicant asserts an interest relating to die property or transaction that is die subject of die action; (3) die applicant is so situated that without intervention, disposition of die action may, as a practical matter, impair or impede die applicant's ability to protect its interest; and (4) die applicant's interest is not adequately represented by die other parties.
Laroe Ests., Inc. v. Town of Chester, 828 F.3d 60, 66 (2d Cir. 2016), vacated and remanded on other grounds sub nom. Town of Chester, N.Y. v. EaroeEsts., Inc., 137 S.Ct. 1645 (2017) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 24(a). “[F]ailure to satisfy any one of these four requirements is a sufficient ground to deny die application.” Floyd v. City of New York, 770 F.3d 1051, 1057 (2d Cir. 2014). “In seeking intervention under this Rule, die proposed intervenor bears die burden of demonstrating that it meets die requirements for intervention.” Kamdem-Ouaffo v. PepsiCo, Inc., 314 F.R.D. 130, 134 (S.D.N.Y. 2016).
Considering these factors, die Court has reviewed Vicky Safra's motion to intervene and concludes that she is entitled to intervention as of right. Accordingly, die motion to intervene is GRANTED.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate die motion pending at Dkt. No. 18.
SO ORDERED.