Opinion
CASE NO. 5:12-cv-03088 EJD
07-15-2014
IN RE LINKEDIN USER PRIVACY LITIGATION
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO INTERVENE
[Docket Item No(s). 107]
Presently before the court is a Motion to Intervene filed by eight individuals: Christopher Donnelly, Christopher Wirth, Frederick Banks, Jonathan Rich, Richard Reid, Noshir Gowadia, Edward Breivik and James Holmes (collectively, "Proposed Intervenors"). See Docket Item No. 107. According to Proposed Intervenors, they seek to intervene as plaintiffs according to sections (a) and (b) of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 because they "have documents, exhibits, charts, and photographs" related to this case.
Although it is their burden to do so, Proposed Intervenors have not identified a valid basis for either intervention as of right under Rule 24(a) or permissive intervention under Rule 24(b), nor have they established the additional elements applicable to each type of intervention. See Petrol Stops Nw. v. Cont'l Oil Co., 647 F.2d 1005, 1010 n.5 (9th Cir. 1981) (describing burden applicable to intervention motions); Sierra Club v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 995 F.2d 1478, 1481 (9th Cir. 1993) (describing elements for intervention as of right); Beckman Indus. v. Int'l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 473 (9th Cir. 1992) (describing elements for permissive intervention). Possession of unspecified related materials is not enough.
Accordingly, the Motion to Intervene is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 15, 2014
/s/__________
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge