Pla int if f d oe s n ot o pp os e CN MI

De sc e nt’ s mo tio n to pa

rt ic ipate a s amicus curiae . 1 Se e Pla int if

f’ s Re sp on se to M oti on

by CN MI De sc e nt f

or L e a ve to P art ic ipate a s Amicus Curiae
. De fe nd ants do op po se that mo tio n. Se e De fe nd ants ’ O pp os iti on to M oti on

fo r L e a ve to Part ic ipate a s Amicus Curiae
. UN I TE D ST AT ES D I STR I CT C OU RT F O R T H E D IS T R IC T O F C O LU M B IA

__________________________________________ ) COMMONWEAL TH OF THE ) NORTHERN MARI ANA I SL ANDS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Ci vi l A cti on No. 08 -15 72 (P L F) ) UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA, e t al
. , ) ) De fe nd ants . ) __________________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON AND ORDER This matter is befor e the Court on (1) the motion of Commonwealth of the No rt he rn Mari ana I sla nd s D e sc e nt f

or Se lf -G ov e rnme nt a

nd I nd ig e no us Rig hts , Inc . ( “ CN MI De sc e nt” ) t o f

ile a br ie f a nd pa rt ic ipate in t

his a c tio n a s amicus curiae , (2) CNMI Desc ent’s
re qu e st f or tim e to p re se nt o ra l argume nt at th e up c omi ngmot ion s h e ari ng , a nd (3 ) t he pa rt ie s’ joint mot ion for entr

y of an or der g overningthe pre sentation of ora l argument at the upcoming motions hearing
. The Court will g rant CNMI Desc ent’s motion to file a brief and par ticipate as 1 amicus curiae , deny

CNMIDesc ent’s re quest for time to pre sent oral a rgument, and modify

the parties’ proposed sc hedule g overningthe pre sentation of ora l argument at the upcomingmotions he ari ng . T he Court

wi ll a lso re sc he du le the up c omi ngmot ion s h e ari ngto b e g in a t 9: 30 a .m. (rather than 10:00 a .m.) on Marc h 12, 2009.2 As a ll a c kn ow le dg e , th is C ourt ha s “ br oa d d isc re tio n” in d e te rm ini ngwh e the r t o pe rm it a pa rt y to p art ic ipate in a

laws uit a s amicus curiae . Nat’l Ass’n of Home B uilders v. United States Army

Corps of Eng ineer s, 519 F. Supp. 2d 89, 93 (D.D.C. 2007). T he filing of an amicus br ie f s ho uld

be pe rm itt e d if

it w ill a ssi st t

he jud g e “ by

pr e se nti ngide a s, argume nts , theories, insig hts, facts or da ta that ar e not to be found in the pa rties’ brie fs.” Voic es for

Choices
v. I lli no is B e ll T e le ph on e Co. , 3 39 F .3 d 5 42 , 5 45 (7 th C ir . 2 00 3) . Se e a lso Ry an v . Co mmo dit y Future s TradingCommi ssion, 125 F.3d 1062, 1063 (7th Cir. 1997) (“ An amicus br ie f s ho uld normally be allowe d when . . . the amicus has unique infor mation or perspe ctive that ca n help the
c ourt be y on d th e he lp t

hat th e lawye rs fo r t

he pa rt ie s a re a ble to p ro vid e .” ). Suc h b ri e fs g e ne ra lly
are not permitted wher e they prese nt “no unique information or perspe ctive” that could assist the Court. Georg ia v. Ashcr oft, 195 F. Supp. 2d 25, 33 (D.D .C. 2002) (three -judg e cour t), vacate d on other grounds , 539 U.S. 461 (2003).

Upon ca ref ul consideration, the Court concludes that CNMI Desc ent’s propose d amicus brief w ill assist the Court in this m atter be cause it includes unique arguments not to be fo un d in the pa rt ie s’ br ie fs . T he Court

the re fo re wi ll p e rm it CN MI De sc e nt t o p art ic ipate in t his
matte r a s amicus curiae by filing its proposed amicus br ie f. Th e Court fu rt he r c on c lud e s, howeve r, that it need not he ar or al ar g ument from CNMI Desc ent at the upc oming motions hear ing in or der to obtain the f ull benefit of CNMI

Desc ent’s views. F or that re ason, the Court wi l l n o tp erm i tC NM IDe s ce n tt o p re s en to ra l ar gu m en tat t h e up co m i n g m o t i o n s h ea ri n g.3 A c c o r d i n g l y, i ti s h e r e b y ORDERED that CNMIDesc ent’s Motion for L eave to Participate a s Amicus Curiae [29] is GRANTED. CNMI Desc ent shall be pe rmitted to participate in this matter a s amicus curiae by

filing its proposed amicus br ie f; it i s FURTHE R ORDERED that CNMIDesc ent’s Reque st for Time to Present Or al Ar g ume nt [4 4] is DENI ED ; it is FURTHE R ORDERED that the motions hearing , curr ently schedule d to beg in at 10 :00 a .m. on

Marc h 1 2, 20 09 , w ill ins te a d b e g in a t 9: 30 a .m. on

Ma rc h 1 2, 20 09 ; and

it i s FURTHE R ORDERED that the following schedule shall g overn the prese ntation
o f o ra l ar gu m en tat t h e up co m i n g m o t i o n s h ea ri n g:

1. Plaintiff shall make a 40- minute presentation of its claims and its arg uments in support of its mot ion for a pr eliminary injunction. 2. De fe nd ants sh a ll m a ke a 40 -m inute argume nt i n s up po rt of the ir motion to di smiss and in opposit ion to plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary

injunction. 3. Th e Court

wi ll r e c e ss f

or 15 min ute s. 4. Pla int if

f s ha ll m ake a

20 -m inute re butta l in

op po sit ion

to de fe nd ants ’ m oti on

to d ism iss and

in r e ply to d e fe nd ants ’ opposition t o plaintiff’s motion for a pr eliminary injunction. 5. De fe nd ants sh a ll m a ke a 20 -m inute re butta l in

re ply to pla int if f’ s o pp os iti on

to d e fe nd ants ’ m oti on

to d ism iss
. SO ORDERED. /s/_______________________________ PAULL . FRI EDMAN United States District J udg e DATE: Mar ch 6, 2009