Miller v. Facebook, Inc. et al

Filing 53

MOTION Plaintiff's Local Counsel to Attend the Initial Case Management Conference filed by Daniel M. Miller. (Attachments: # 1 Stipulation, # 2 Proposed Order)(Hancock, Brian) (Filed on 5/21/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 D. GILL SPERLEIN (172887) THE LAW OFFICE OF D. GILL SPERLEIN 584 Castro Street, Suite 879 San Francisco, California 94114 Telephone: (415) 404-6615 Facsimile: (415) 404-6616 gill@sperleinlaw.com DOUGLAS L. BRIDGES (pro hac vice) HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS, LLC 1 Glenlake Parkway, Suite 700 Atlanta, Georgia 30328 Telephone: (678) 638-6309 Facsimile: (678) 638-6142 dbridges@hgdlawfirm.com BRIAN D. HANCOCK (pro hac vice) HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS, LLC 2224 1st Avenue North Birmingham, Alabama 35203 Telephone: (205) 326-3336 Facsimile: (205) 326-3332 bdhancock@hgdlawfirm.com Attorneys for Plaintiff, DANIEL M. MILLER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO.: CV-10-264 (WHA) PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF, PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7-11, TO ALLOW LOCAL COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF ATTEND THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DANIEL M. MILLER, Plaintiff, vs. FACEBOOK, INC. and YAO WEI YEO, Defendants. -1- PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF CV-10-264 (WHA) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED that lead trial counsel for the Plaintiff, Brian D. Hancock and Douglas L. Bridges, are excused from attending the Initial Case Management Conference in this action scheduled for May 27, 2010 at 8:00 A.M. Dated: WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -2- PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF CV-10-264 (WHA)

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?