Opinion
2012-1600 2012-1606
09-18-2012
APPLE INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., AND SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, Defendants-Cross Appellants.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in case no. 11-CV-1846, Judge Lucy H. Koh.
ON MOTION
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
First Amendment Coalition (FAC) moves to intervene, to reform the caption, and to set an expedited briefing schedule. Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (Samsung) oppose the motions.
Both Samsung and Apple have appealed from orders partially denying motions to seal the record. FAC, which was not a party to the action and did not seek to participate below, now moves to intervene.
A party that has not moved to intervene at the trial court must satisfy a more exacting standard to justify intervention on appeal. See Landreth Timber Co. v. Landreth, 731 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir. 1984) ("A court of appeals may permit intervention where none was sought in district court 'only in an exceptional case for imperative reasons[.]"' (citation omitted); Spring Constr. Co., Inc. v. Harris, 614 F.2d 374, 377 n.1 (4th Cir. 1980) ("[M]ost cases have held that intervention on appeal will be granted only under exceptional circumstances.").
Here, we cannot say that standard has been met. We therefore deny FAC's motion to intervene. FAC, however, may move to file a brief amicus curiae as set forth below. Because FAC is not a party to this appeal, we deny its other motions.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) FAC's motions are denied.
(2) FAC may move for leave to file a brief amicus curiae with the brief attached no later than 14 days after Samsung's brief is filed.
FOR THE COURT
___________
Jan Horbaly
Clerk
cc: Kathleen M. Sullivan, Esq.
William F. Lee, Esq.
William R. Stein, Esq.
s19