Perdue

Natural Grocers v. Perdue

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 29, 20213:20-cv-05151California710 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 NATURAL GROCERS, et al., Case No. 20-cv-05151-JD

Plaintiffs,

ORDER RE MOTION TO INTERVENE

v. 6 Re: Dkt. No. 29 SONNY PERDUE, et al., Defendants.

9 For the request to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 by the agricultural trade associations and groups, Dkt. No. 29, intervention as of right is denied. The Court assumes that the first three elements of the pertinent four-factor test have been satisfied. See Oakland Bulk & Oversized Terminal LLC v. City of Oakland, 960 F.3d 603, 620 (9th Cir. 2020). With respect to the fourth element, the proposed intervenors have not shown that they will not be adequately represented by existing parties, namely the United States defendants. See id. Because the proposed intervenors and the government share the same ultimate objective of upholding the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, 83 Fed. Reg 65,814 et seq. (Dec. 21, 2018), and the government is already acting in this litigation on behalf of that common …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.