Opinion ID: 781207
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Proper parties to this appeal

Text: 24 In their opposition brief, the union pointed out that two of the appellants — Teresa Wilson Sloan and Miyako Kanai — were omitted from the Notice of Appeal. The workers subsequently moved to correct the Notice of Appeal, which was allowed by the Deputy Clerk. The union then filed a Motion to Reconsider Deputy Clerk's Order Granting Appellants' Motion to Correct Clerical Mistake in Appellants' Notice of Appeal, and the workers filed an opposition. This motion has been referred to this panel. 25 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 3(c) provides that [a]n appeal must not be dismissed ... for failure to name a party whose intent to appeal is otherwise clear from the notice. If a court determines it is objectively clear that a party intended to appeal, there are neither administrative concerns nor fairness concerns that should prevent the appeal from going forward. Fed. R.App. P. 3(c) advisory committee's note. It is clear from the record that the omission of Wilson-Sloan and Kanai was an inadvertent clerical error stemming from their counsel's use of an incorrect caption; other pleadings before the district court (where the omitted plaintiffs clearly were parties) included the same incorrect caption. Furthermore, the workers' opening brief indicates that there are twenty-five appellants. Under such circumstances, it is objectively clear that the omitted workers intended to appeal; the Deputy Clerk properly allowed correction of the Notice of Appeal, and the motion for reconsideration is therefore denied.