NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta

— 1 — — 2 — — 3 — 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION — 7 — 8 NETCHOICE, LLC, Case No. 22-cv-08861-BLF 9 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS 10 v. FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS 11 ROB BONTA, [Re: ECF 33, 34, 42, 45, 52, 53, 56] 12 Defendant. — 13 — — 14 — — 15 — 16 The Court received seven motions for leave to file amicus curiae briefs in connection with 17 Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction. The motions and proposed briefs were filed by: 18 Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America (ECF 33); Professor Eric Goldman 19 (ECF 34); Chamber of Progress, IP Justice, and LGBT Tech Institute (ECF 42); Computer & 20 Communications Industry Association (ECF 45); Electronic Privacy Information Center, Reset 21 Tech, Frances Haugen, and Former Government Officials (ECF 52); Fairplay and Public Health 22 Advocacy Institute (ECF 53); and The New York Times Company and Student Press Law Center 23 (ECF 56). 24 “The district court has broad discretion to appoint amici curiae,” and a decision to appoint 25 amici may be reversed only for abuse of discretion. Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1260 (9th 26 Cir. 1982), abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). “There are no 27 strict prerequisites to qualify as amici.” Sec. & Exch. Comm’n v. Bittrex Inc., No. 2:23-CV1 their participation is useful to the court. See id. The “classic role” of amici curiae encompasses 2 “assisting in a case of general public interest, supplementing the efforts of counsel, and drawing 3 the court’s attention to law that escaped consideration.” Miller-Wohl Co. v. Comm’r of Lab. & 4 Indus. State of Mont., 694 F.2d 203, 204 (9th Cir. 1982). 5 As stated on the record during the hearing on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, 6 || the Court appreciates the excellent work of all the amici who filed briefs. Those briefs rounded 7 out the arguments presented by the parties and were useful to the Court in considering the 8 important issues raised in this case. Accordingly, in the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the 9 seven motions for leave to file amicus curiae briefs are GRANTED. 10 ORDER 11 (1) The motions for leave to file amicus curiae briefs are GRANTED; and 12 (2) This order terminates ECF 33, 34, 42, 45, 52, 53, and 56. 14 Dated: September 18, 2023 2 ETH LABSON FREEMAN 16 United States District Judge — 18 — — 19 — — 20 — — 21 — — 22 — — 23 — — 24 — — 25 — — 26 — — 27 — — 28 —