Borden, Inc
Volume 89 · 89 F.T.C. 207
Cite this decision
Borden, Inc, 89 F.T.C. 207 (1977). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v089-0028
Report an error in this record (decision id v089-0028)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
IN THE MATTER OF BORDEN, INC.
Docket 8978. Interlocutory Ordr, Apr. 5, 1977 Order granting motion by Department of Commerce to file brief as amicus curiae; accepting brief as fied; and granting counsel 30 days to file responsive brief's. ORDER On March 8, 1977, the United States Department of Commerce moved for leave to fie a brief as amicus curiae in this appeal. The Department' s brief was conditionally fied therewith. Complaint counsel and counsel for respondent Borden, Inc. have informally indicated to the Offce of the Secretary that they do not intend to fie in opposition to the motion.
While the Commission s Rules of Practice do not expressly provide for the fiing of amicus curiae briefs, we have granted amicus treatment to certain fiings under section 3. , which governs intervention in Commission proceedings. See g., Corning Glass Works, 82 F.T:C. 1082 (March 22, 1973). Section 3. 14 is broadly drafted, providing for orders permitting intervention "to such extent and upon such terms as are provided by law or as otherwise may be deemed proper.
A motion for leave to file a brief amicus curiae addresses the discretion of the tribunal. As the term itself and the tradition from which it arises make clear, the role of the amicus is not to vindicate its own rights but to clarify for the tribunal the broad implications of the question before it. The brief of the Department of Commerce fits squarely within this role.
It would obviously have been preferable to receive this motion and brief at an earlier stage of the appeal.' At this point, all briefs have been fied and oral argument heard. Absent special circumstances leave to file at this point might well be denied to avoid the disruption and possible delay attendant on granting it. In the present instance however, the importance of the issue involved and the uniqueness of the Department's perspective outweigh these considerations. It is therefore ordered, That the motion for leave to fie a brief as amicus curiae be granted, that the brief be accepted as filed, and that complaint counsel and counsel for respondent Borden, Inc., have thirty days to fie responsive briefs, if they so desire. , The U.S. Court.s of Appeals, by way of analogy, require gcnera!Jy that an amicusbriefbc fied no later than that of the party the briefwil! support Rule 29, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure Interlocutory Order 89 F.