Barraza v. Cricket Wireless, LLC et al

Filing 16

ORDER DENYING PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY BRYCE B. BELL by Hon. William Alsup denying 13 Motion for Pro Hac Vice.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
FLOR BARRAZA,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
CRICKET WIRELESS LLC,

ORDER DENYING PRO
HAC VICE APPLICATION OF
ATTORNEY BRYCE B. BELL

Defendant.
/

15
16

No. C 15-02471 WHA

The pro hac vice application of Attorney Bryce B. Bell (Dkt. No. 13) is DENIED for

17

failing to comply with Civil Local Rule 11-3. The local rule requires that an applicant certify

18

that “he or she is an active member in good standing of the bar of a United States Court or of the

19

highest court of another State or the District of Columbia, specifying such bar” (emphasis

20

added). Filling out the pro hac vice form from the district court website such that it only

21

identifies the state of bar membership — such as “the bar of Texas” — is inadequate under the

22

local rule because it fails to identify a specific court (such as the Supreme Court of Texas).

23

While the application fee does not need to be paid again, the application cannot be processed

24

until a corrected form is submitted.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: June 17, 2015.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE