Amkor Technology, Inc. v. Carsem (M) Sdn Bhd et al
Filing
74
ORDER DENYING PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY ANDREW PRATT by Hon. William Alsup denying 68 Motion for Pro Hac Vice.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/14/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, Inc.,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER DENYING PRO HAC
VICE APPLICATION OF
ATTORNEY ANDREW PRATT
CARSEM (M) SDN BHD, et al.,,
Defendants.
/
15
16
No. C 03-5116 WHA
The pro hac vice application of Attorney Andrew Pratt (Dkt. No. 68) is DENIED for
17
failing to specify membership in good standing of a United States Court or the highest court of
18
another State or the District of Columbia. Merely claiming membership of “the bar of the state
19
of Washington” is insufficient under the civil local rules. While the application fee does not
20
need to be paid again, the application cannot be processed until a corrected form is submitted.
21
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: January 14, 2013.
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?