Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College et al

Filing 39

MOTION for Leave to File REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO INTERVENE by M. B., K. C., Sarah Cole, Y. D., G. E., A. G., I. G., R. H., J. L., Fadhal Moore, Arjini Kumari Nawal, R. S., Itzel Vasquez-Rodriguez, Keyanna Wigglesworth. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Reply)(Hall, Rahsaan)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS BOSTON DIVISION STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC, Plaintiff, v. PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE (HARVARD CORPORATION), Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-14176-ADB Defendant. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO INTERVENE Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(b)(3), Proposed Defendant-Intervenors seek leave of the Court to submit an 11-page reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition and Harvard’s Response to the Motion to Intervene. The Proposed Reply is attached to this Motion as Exhibit A. A reply memorandum is necessary to address several matters raised by the Parties. Specifically, the Parties’ arguments mischaracterize the applicable legal standards for intervention as of right under Rule 24(a)(2) and Movants’ Proposed Reply offers points of authority that will assist the Court in resolving the issue. Additionally, because this motion is dispositive for Movants’ involvement as a party in the case, and a denial would be immediately appealable, see Brotherhood of R. R. Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 331 U.S. 519, 52425 (1947), a reply memorandum is warranted. A reply is also necessary to respond to the Parties’ contentions that Movants should be relegated to amici curiae. Movants’ participation as amici would deprive the Court of the full benefit of Movants’ adversarial role and would deprive Movants of the ability to protect their interests. The Proposed Reply explains why Movants’ participation as a party would not result in the unwieldy or lengthy discovery that the Parties cited in their opposition memoranda. The Proposed Reply does not reiterate arguments in Movants’ opening brief, but rather clarifies dispositive legal issues that Plaintiff and Defendant have contested. Respectfully submitted, Dated: May 15, 2015 /s/ Rahsaan D. Hall Rahsaan D. Hall, BBO # 645369 LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE 294 Washington St. Suite 443 Boston, MA 02108 Tel: (617) 988-0608 /s/ Jon M. Greenbaum Jon M. Greenbaum, DC Bar # 489887 (pro hac motion pending) LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW 1401 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Tel: (202) 662-8600 ATTORNEYS FOR PROPOSED DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS 2 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE In accordance with Local Rule 7.1(a), I hereby certify that I conferred with counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant in connection with this motion. Defendant consents to the filing of a reply. Plaintiff opposes a submission longer than five pages. /s/ Jon M. Greenbaum Jon M. Greenbaum CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE In accordance with Local Rule 5.2(b), I hereby certify that this document filed through the ECF system on May 15, 2015 will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing. /s/ Rahsaan D. Hall Rahsaan D. Hall

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?