DeMois v. Facebook, Inc. et al

Filing 53

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY ANDREW DITCHFIELD PRO HAC VICE. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 26, 2012. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/26/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 VERNON R. DeMOIS, JR., Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 FACEBOOK, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 3:12-cv-03196-MMC [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE 17 18 Andrew Ditchfield, whose business address and telephone number is 19 Andrew Ditchfield DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP 450 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017 Telephone: (212) 450-4000 20 21 22 and who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the United States District Court for the 23 Southern District of New York, having applied in the above-entitled action for admission to 24 practice in the Northern District of California on a pro hac vice basis, representing Defendant 25 Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC. 26 27 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application is granted, subject to the terms and conditions of Civil L.R. 11-3. All papers filed by the attorney must indicate appearance pro hac 1 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE CASE NO. 3:12-CV-03196-MMC 1 vice. Service of papers upon and communication with co-counsel designated in the application will 2 constitute notice to the party. All future filings in this action are subject to the requirements 3 contained in General Order No. 45, Electronic Case Filing. 4 5 Dated: July 26, 2012 6 The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE CASE NO. 3:12-CV-03196-MMC

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?