Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-md-02672/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-md-02672-136/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: VOLKSWAGEN “CLEAN DIESEL” 

MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND 

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

_____________________________________/

This Order Relates To:

ALL ACTIONS (except the securities action)

______________________________________/

MDL No. 2672 CRB (JSC)

ORDER DENYING JOLIAN KANGAS’ 

MOTION TO INTERVENE 

Jolian Kangas filed a Motion to Intervene to appeal the Court’s Order denying his motion 

to intervene to conduct discovery. (Dkt. No. 1896; see Dkt. No. 1746.) Kangas does not need to 

intervene to appeal. His reliance on United Airlines, Inc. v. McDonald, 432 U.S. 385 (1977), for 

the proposition that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 requires him to file a motion to intervene 

to appeal the denial of intervention (Dkt. No. 1896 at 2) is misplaced. United Airlines concerned 

a post-final judgment motion to intervene to appeal both a denial of intervention and a denial of 

class certification. 432 U.S. at 390. The Court held that such a motion is timely when the putative 

intervenor files the motion within the time period the named plaintiffs could have taken an appeal. 

(Id. at 396-97.) But there has been no final judgment and no denial of class certification here. The 

Court therefore DENIES his Motion. Intervention is not necessary under the circumstances to 

appeal the denial of the motion to intervene. See Smith v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist., 830 F.3d 

843 (9th Cir. 2016) (considering appeal of district court’s denial of appellant’s motion to intervene 

in class action lawsuit); Stringfellow v. Concerned Neighbors in Action, 480 U.S. 370, 377 (1987) 

(“[W]hen an order prevents a putative intervenor from becoming a party in any respect, the order 

is subject to immediate review.”). 

This Order disposes of Docket No. 1896. 

Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2100 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 24, 2016

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2100 Filed 10/24/16 Page 2 of 2