IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
	FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

NIGHTLIGHT CHRISTIAN ADOPTIONS,		)
individually and as next friend for Potential Embryo		)
Adoptees; CHRISTIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION;	)
DR. DAVID A. PRENTICE, on behalf of himself and	)
all others similarly situated; JAMES P. &  			) Civil Action No. 01 CV 502 (RCL)
DONIELLE D. BRINKMAN; PETER E. &			)
SUZANNE M. MURRAY;  BRUCE L. &			)	
SUSAN E. STURCH,					)	 
)
Plaintiffs,						)
)
v. 					)
)
TOMMY G. THOMPSON, in his official capacity as	)
Secretary of the Department of Health and Human		)
Services,; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 		)
HUMAN SERVICES; DR. RUTH KIRSCHSTEIN, 	)
in her official capacity as Acting Director of the 		)
National Institutes of Health; NATIONAL 			)
INSTITUTES OF HEALTH,					)
)
Defendants.						)
________________________________________________)

	MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE
	AS DEFENDANTS AND CROSS-CLAIMANTS

Dr. James Thomson, Dr. Roger Pedersen, Dr. John Gearhart, Dr. Douglas Melton, Dr. Dan Kaufman, Dr. Alan Trounson, Dr. Martin Pera, Christopher Reeve, James Cordy, and James Tyree (collectively, AMovants@) hereby respectfully move pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) or, alternatively, Rule 24(b)(2) for leave to intervene in this action as Defendants and Cross-Claimants.   Copies of Intervenor-Defendants= Answer to Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Intervenor-Defendants= Cross-Claim for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief are attached hereto.  

The grounds for this Motion are set forth in full in the accompanying Memorandum, to which Movants respectfully refer the Court.  In brief, those grounds are as follows:
1.	Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on March 8, 2001, seeking to declare unlawful and enjoin the implementation of the NIH Guidelines for Research Using Human Pluripotent Stem Cells (hereinafter the Guidelines) promulgated by Defendants that provide for federal funding of scientific research involving human pluripotent stem cells derived from human embryos and fetal tissue.  65 Fed. Reg. 51976 (Aug. 25, 2000).  Defendants are the Department of Health and Human Services (AHHS@); Tommy G. Thompson, in his official capacity as Secretary of HHS; the National Institutes of Health (ANIH@); and Dr. Ruth Kirschstein, in her official capacity as Acting Director of NIH.
2.	These pluripotent stem cells are self-replicating and have the potential to develop into virtually any tissue type or organ.  Accordingly, research on these cells holds the promise for dramatically improved treatments and eventual cures for millions of persons suffering from some of the most devastating illnesses, including diabetes, Parkinson=s Disease, Alzheimer=s Disease, spinal cord injuries, cancer, heart disease, and many others.
3.	The Guidelines authorize NIH to fund scientific research involving these pluripotent stem cells and to establish certain procedures which ensure that such research is lawful and ethical.  Essentially, the Guidelines permit federal funding of research involving human pluripotent stem cells derived, without federal funding, from human fetal tissue or from embryos that are the result of in vitro fertilization and are Ain excess of clinical need@ B in other words, surplus embryos that otherwise would be destroyed or not used by the individuals seeking fertility treatment.

4.	Plaintiffs are opposed to federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research.  Plaintiffs consist of Nightlight Christian Adoptions, which contends that it engages in Aadoption@ of human embryos stored in fertilization clinics, and also purports to act as Anext friend@ for all APotential Embryo Adoptees@ (surplus embryos currently stored in fertilization clinics); Christian Medical Association, a not-for-profit association of doctors and dentists opposed to research on embryonic stem cells; Dr. David A. Prentice, a university professor engaged in research on adult stem cells who complains of the allegedly increased competition for federal funds that would result if federal funding were available to those engaged in embryonic stem cell research; and James and Donielle Brinkman, Peter and Suzanne Murray, and Bruce and Susan Sturch, who claim to be clients of Nightlight and who wish to adopt embryos for implantation. 
5.	 Plaintiffs= two-count Complaint alleges that the Guidelines were promulgated contrary to federal law and constitute arbitrary and capricious agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. ' 706(2).  Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to invalidate and rescind implementation of the Guidelines.
6.	Movants support the legality of the Guidelines and seek immediate implementation of those Guidelines, as required by federal statute.  Movants include prominent scientists in the field of human pluripotent stem cell research who have applied or intend to apply for NIH funding of research involving human pluripotent stem cells if the current moratorium on funding is lifted.  Movants also include patients who suffer from disorders such as Type I (juvenile) diabetes, spinal cord injuries, and Parkinson=s Disease, for which human pluripotent stem cell research is a primary source for a cellular or tissue replacement treatment or cure.

7.	Movants seek leave to intervene in this action as a matter of right pursuant to Rule 24(a) or, alternatively, by permission pursuant to Rule 24(b)(2).  As demonstrated in their supporting Memorandum, Movants are entitled to intervene in this proceeding because Plaintiffs= lawsuit threatens materially and adversely to affect Movants= substantial interests, and those interests cannot adequately be protected unless Movants are made parties to this action.
8.	 Indeed, Defendants already have demonstrated that they can not or will not represent Movants= interest in immediate implementation of the Guidelines.  Defendants have suspended consideration of applications submitted pursuant to the Guidelines for research involving pluripotent stem cells; have canceled an NIH meeting that had been scheduled to review those applications; and have deferred implementation of the Guidelines while HHS considers whether to rescind the Guidelines.  Accordingly, Movants seek leave to intervene to file their Answer and Cross-Claim for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, which seeks a declaration that the Guidelines do not conflict with federal statutory law, as well as declaratory and injunctive relief to require Defendants to implement the Guidelines and begin the NIH process for funding scientifically meritorious grant applications for research involving human pluripotent stem cells.
9.	Movants request an oral hearing on this Motion pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.1(f).
10.	Movants have consulted with counsel for Plaintiffs and for Defendants pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.1(m).  Counsel for Plaintiffs stated that he is not in a position to consent to this Motion.  Counsel for Defendants stated that Defendants have not yet determined whether to oppose this Motion or not.
11.	A proposed Order is attached.

WHEREFORE, Movants request that the Court grant their Motion to Intervene as Defendants and Cross-Claimants.

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________
Marci A. Eisenstein			Jeffrey C. Martin
Max G. Brittain, Jr.			DC Bar No. 350421	
Frederick J. Sperling			Richard M. Wyner
Aphrodite Kokolis			DC Bar No. 376320
Julie J. Furer				Donald J. Munro
Schiff Hardin & Waite		DC Bar No. 453600
6600 Sears Tower			Shea & Gardner
Chicago, Illinois  60606		1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
(312) 258-5500			Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 828-2000
Clarence T. Kipps, Jr.
DC Bar No. 007088
Miller & Chevalier
1450 G Street, NW
9th Floor
Washington, DC  20005
(202) 626-5840

	Attorneys for Movants

May 2, 2001