Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 1118

ORDER of USCA as to 1111 Notice of Appeal filed by Terry M. Myers (vlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2012)

Case: 12-15482

03/28/2012

ID: 8119247

DktEntry: 11-1

Page: 1 of 3

FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware
corporation; et al.,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.

MAR 28 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

No. 12-15482
D.C. No. 4:07-cv-01658-PJH
Northern District of California,
Oakland

TERRY M. MYERS,
ORDER
Intervenor - Appellant,
v.
SAP AG, a German corporation; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.

Before: Peter L. Shaw, Appellate Commissioner.
On April 26, 2011 and December 12, 2011, the district court entered orders
denying appellant Terry Myers’s two motions to intervene. No notice of appeal
was filed within 60 days of either of those orders. On January 12, 2012, the district
court entered an order stating that the district court would not accept appellant’s
motion improperly sent by e-mail and that appellant may not send submissions to
the court by e-mail in the future. The order also stated that the court has reviewed,
considered, and denied two prior motions to intervene, and it would not accept for

SM/Pro Se

Case: 12-15482

03/28/2012

ID: 8119247

DktEntry: 11-1

Page: 2 of 3

filing, consider, or respond to any additional such motions. On March 1, 2012,
appellant filed a notice of appeal.
Because the March 1, 2012 notice of appeal was not filed within 60 days
after the April 26, 2011 and December 12, 2011 orders, the scope of this appeal is
limited to review of the January 12, 2012 order.
A review of the record demonstrates that this appeal may be appropriate for
summary disposition because the questions on which the decision in the appeal
depends may be so insubstantial as not to justify further proceedings. See 9th Cir.
R. 3-6; see also Hoover v. Switlik Parachute Co., 663 F.2d 964, 966 (9th Cir.
1981) (as a general rule, a person has standing to appeal if he or she was a party to
the action at the time judgment was entered).
Within 21 days from the date of this order, appellant shall show cause why
the judgment in this appeal should not be summarily affirmed. Appellees may file
a reply to appellant’s response within ten days from service of the response.
In addition, a review of this court’s docket reflects that the filing and
docketing fees for this appeal remain due. Within 21 days after the date of this
order, appellant shall pay to the district court the $455.00 filing and docketing fees
for this appeal and file in this court proof of such payment or file in this court a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Failure to pay the fees or file a motion to
proceed in forma pauperis shall result in the automatic dismissal of the appeal by
the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1.

SM/Pro Se

2

12-15482

Case: 12-15482

03/28/2012

ID: 8119247

DktEntry: 11-1

Page: 3 of 3

The Clerk shall serve a Form 4 financial affidavit on appellant.
Appellant’s failure to comply with this order will result in the automatic
dismissal of this appeal by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1.

SM/Pro Se

3

12-15482