Federal Trade Commission v. DIRECTV, Inc. et al

Filing 408

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. DENYING 406 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/25/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

v.

Case No. 15-cv-01129-HSG
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF
Re: Dkt. No. 406

DIRECTV, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

12
13

Before the Court is Public Good Law Center, Consumers Union, Consumer Action, and

14

National Association of Consumer Advocates’ motion for leave to file an amicus brief in support

15

of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”). See Dkt. No. 406.

16

Courts have discretion to permit amicus briefing and will often do so if it is “useful to or

17

otherwise desirable to the court.” In re DRAM Antitrust Litig., No. M 02-1486 PJH, 2007 WL

18

2022026, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 9, 2007). The Court having fully heard the FTC on all its claims at

19

trial, the issue now is whether the FTC has met its burden of proof in this case. But the proposed

20

amicus brief simply repeats arguments raised by the FTC, without offering any “unique

21

information or perspective that can help the court” decide the issue now before it. See IO Group,

22

Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc., No. 06-03926-HRL, 2007 WL 2433385, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22,

23

2007) (quotation omitted). Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion.

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 10/25/2017
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge