Case 2:25-cv-00978-APG-BNW Document 74 Filed 09/15/25 Page 5 of 8
Together, the Tribal Amici all have a shared, strong interest in this case because of its
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
potential to have a significant impact on their or their member tribes’ rights regarding gaming on
Indian lands, as well as Indian gaming and tribal governmental revenue as a whole. Such revenue
is vital and provides funding for essential government services, tribal programs, and economic
development needed to reach the goals of self-governance and self-sufficiency.
II.
ARGUMENT
The Local Rules for the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada do not provide the
procedure for or address the propriety of amicus briefs. See generally Local Rules of Practice
(Apr. 17, 2020). However, this Court may, in its discretion, “grant leave to appear as an amicus if
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
the information offered is ‘timely and useful.’” Long v. Coast Resorts, Inc. , 49 F.Supp.2d 1177,
1178 (D. Nev. 1999) (quoting Waste Mgmt. of Pa., Inc. v. City of York , 162 F.R.D. 34, 6 (M.D. Pa.
1995)). “Amicus briefs traditionally assist a court in cases of public interest as a supplement to the
parties’ arguments or to draw the court’s attention to law that has escaped consideration.” United
States v. Kovar , 2025 WL 1695397, at *1 (D. Nev. June 17, 2025) (quoting Elias v. Wynn Las
Vegas, LLC , 2025 WL 489982, at *1 (D. Nev. Feb. 1, 2025)).
Here, the proposed amicus brief is both timely and useful. 3 First, this motion and the accompanying amicus brief are timely because they are filed within 7 days of the filing of the
Nevada Defendants’ response to Crypto.com’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. Pursuant to
Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, “[a]n amicus curiae must file its brief,
accompanied by a motion for filing when necessary, no later than 7 days after the principal brief of
the party being supported is filed.” Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(6). While there is no corresponding rule
at the district court level, this Court may rely on Rule 29 as guidance for what is considered timely.
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
3 Additionally, counsel for Defendants and Intervenors have consented to the filing of this brief. Counsel for Plaintiff has confirmed that Plaintiff does not oppose the filing of this motion for leave, provided it has two weeks from the date of filing for a response.
- 5 -
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs