Fortinet Inc. v. FireEye Inc.

Filing 152

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 151 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2015)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 Fortinet Inc. Plaintiff(s), 4 v. 5 FireEye Inc. 6 Defendant(s). 7 8 9 10 11 12 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No: 3:13-cv-02496-HSG APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE (CIVIL LOCAL RULE 11-3) I, Phong T. Dinh , an active member in good standing of the bar of District of Columbia Court of Appeals , hereby respectfully apply for admission to practice pro hac vice in the Northern District of California FireEye Inc. representing: in the , an above-entitled action. My local co-counsel in this case is Rachel M. Walsh attorney who is a member of the bar of this Court in good standing and who maintains an office within the State of California. 13 MY ADDRESS OF RECORD: LOCAL CO-COUNSEL'S ADDRESS OF RECORD: 14 Goodwin Procter LLP 901 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20001-4432 Goodwin Procter LLP Three Embarcadero Center, 24th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4003 15 MY TELEPHONE # OF RECORD: LOCAL CO-COUNSEL'S TELEPHONE # OF RECORD: (202) 346-4000 (415) 733-6000 MY EMAIL ADDRESS OF RECORD: LOCAL CO-COUNSEL'S EMAIL ADDRESS OF RECORD: PDinh@goodwinprocter.com RWalsh@goodwinprocter.com 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I am an active member in good standing of a United States Court or of the highest court of another State or the District of Columbia, as indicated above; my bar number is: 1004477. A true and correct copy of a certificate of good standing or equivalent official document from said bar is attached to this application. I agree to familiarize myself with, and abide by, the Local Rules of this Court, especially the Standards of Professional Conduct for attorneys and the Alternative Dispute Resolution Local Rules. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. /s/ Phong T. Dinh Dated: 08/12/2015 APPLICANT Phong T. Dinh ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application of Phong T. Dinh 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 vice. Service of papers upon, and communication with, local cocounsel designated in the application will constitute notice to the party. Dated: 8/13/2015 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE American LegalNet, Inc. PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION & ORDER October 2012 ~istrid of a.lnlumhia a.lourtnf J\ppenls dlommifue on J\bmissimts 430 If ~irtei, ~t;II ~ - ~om 123 ~aslpngton, ~EL dl~ znnn1 202 I 879-2710 I, JULIO 5'\.. C.JlSTILLO, C(erli of tlie 1Jistrict of Co(umbia Court of .:Ayyeafs, do liereby certify tliat PHONG TRUONG DINH -was on NOVEMBER 4, 2011 du(y qua(ijied and admitted as an attorney and counse(or entit(ed to yractice before tliis Court and is, on tlie date indicated be(ow, an active member in good standing of tliis ~ar. In Testimony Wliereofi I liave fiereunto su13scribed my name andaffixed tlie seafof tfiis Court at tlie City of Wasliingtcm 'D.C., on August 12, 2015 . jULIO A. CASTILLO C(erli of tlie Court CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 2 The undersigned hereby certified that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 3 document has been served on August 12, 2015, to all counsel of record who are deemed to have 4 consented to electronic service via the Court’s CM/ECF system per Civil Local Rule 5-5. Any 5 counsel of record who have not consented to electronic service through the Court’s CM/ECF system 6 will be served by electronic mail, first class mail, facsimile and/or overnight delivery. 7 Dated: August 12, 2015 Respectfully Submitted, By: /s/ Phong T. Dinh Phong T. Dinh 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Application for Admission of Pro Hac Vice Case No. 3:13-CV-02496-HSG

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?