United States v. Walmart Inc.

D. Delaware

United States v. Walmart Inc.

DecidedJune 14, 2021

Docket1:20-cv-01744

StatusUnknown

This text of United States v. Walmart Inc. (United States v. Walmart Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Walmart Inc., (D. Del. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, Vv. Civil Action No. 20-1744-CFC WALMART INC. and WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM ORDER Pending before me is a motion filed by Jay K. Joshi requesting leave to file

an amicus curiae brief. DI. 15. “TA] district court’s decision to accept or reject an amicus filing is entirely within the court’s discretion.” In re Nazi Era Cases Against German Defendants Litig., 153 F. App'x 819, 827 (3d Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). “[District] [c]ourts will exercise their discretion to allow an amicus curiae brief to be filed if [R]ule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is satisfied by demonstrating, under the most lenient standard, that (1) the movant has an adequate interest in the appeal; (2) the information supplied is desirable; and (3) the information being provided is relevant.” In re Weinstein Co. Holdings, LLC, 2020 WL 1320821, at

*1,n.3 (D.Del. Mar. 20, 2020); see also Neonatology Assocs., P.A. v. CLR., 293 F.3d 128, 131 (3d Cir. 2002). Joshi’s proposed brief provides neither desirable nor relevant information with respect to the legal questions presented in this case. Accordingly, I will deny his motion. NOW THEREFORE, at Wilmington this Fourteenth day of June in 2021, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Jay K. Joshi’s Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief (DI. 15) is DENIED.

hg o UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, Vv. Civil Action No. 20-1744-CFC WALMART INC. and WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM ORDER Pending before me is a motion filed by Jay K. Joshi requesting leave to file

an amicus curiae brief. DI. 15. “TA] district court’s decision to accept or reject an amicus filing is entirely within the court’s discretion.” In re Nazi Era Cases Against German Defendants Litig., 153 F. App'x 819, 827 (3d Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). “[District] [c]ourts will exercise their discretion to allow an amicus curiae brief to be filed if [R]ule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is satisfied by demonstrating, under the most lenient standard, that (1) the movant has an adequate interest in the appeal; (2) the information supplied is desirable; and (3) the information being provided is relevant.” In re Weinstein Co. Holdings, LLC, 2020 WL 1320821, at

*1,n.3 (D.Del. Mar. 20, 2020); see also Neonatology Assocs., P.A. v. CLR., 293 F.3d 128, 131 (3d Cir. 2002). Joshi’s proposed brief provides neither desirable nor relevant information with respect to the legal questions presented in this case. Accordingly, I will deny his motion. NOW THEREFORE, at Wilmington this Fourteenth day of June in 2021, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Jay K. Joshi’s Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief (DI. 15) is DENIED.

hg o UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue John J. And Ophelia J. Mall v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Estate of Steven Sobo, Deceased and Bonnie Sobo, and Bonnie Sobo, Surviving Wife v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Akhileshi S. And Dipti A. Desai v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Kevin T. And Cheryl McManus v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Arthur and Lois M. Hirshkowitz v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Lakewood Radiology, P.A. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Neonatology Associates, P.A., John J. And Ophelia Mall, Estate of Steven Sobo, Deceased and Bonnie Sobo, and Bonnie Sobo, Surviving Wife, Akhileshi S. And Dipti A. Desai, Kevin T. And Cheryl McManus Arthur and Lois M. Hirshkowitz and Lakewood Radiology, P.A.

293 F.3d 128 (Third Circuit, 2002)

Wortham v. Karstadtquelle AG

153 F. App'x 819 (Third Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

United States v. Walmart Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-walmart-inc-ded-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack