Bouman

MEMORANDUM *

The Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (ALADS) moved to intervene as a matter of right pursuant to F.R.C.P. 24(a) and permissively pursuant to F.R.C.P. 24(b) in a class action suit filed against the Los Angeles Sheriffs Department (the Department). The district court denied the motion as untimely. ALADS appeals.

I

The denial of a motion for intervention as a matter of right is appealable as a final decision within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Donnelly v. Glickman, 159 F.3d 405 , 409 (9th Cir.1998). We review the denial of a motion to intervene as a matter of right de novo; however, we review a finding of untimeliness for an abuse of discretion. Northwest Forest Res. Council v. Glickman, 82 F.3d 825 , 836 (9th Cir. 1996).

*939 We “have never squarely held that the denial of a motion to intervene permissively is a ‘final decision’ within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 [.]” League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Wilson, 131 F.3d 1297 , 1307 (9th Cir.1997) (“LULAC”). We first determine whether the denial of a motion to intervene permissively was an abuse of discretion. Id. at 1308. If so, we retain jurisdiction and will reverse; if not, we will dismiss…