ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan Board of Trustees et al v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Company et al

Filing 36

ORDER DENYING PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY MARK B. BLOCKER by Hon. William Alsup denying 34 Motion for Pro Hac Vice.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2015)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9

ILWU-PMA WELFARE PLAN BOARD
OF TRUSTEES and ILWU-PMA
WELFARE PLAN,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

No. C 15-2965 WHA

Plaintiffs,
v.

15

CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, GREATWEST LIFE & ANNUITY INSURANCE
COMPANY, and CAREWISE HEALTH,
INC. f/k/a Ships Health Management
Solutions, Inc.,

16

Defendants.

13
14

ORDER DENYING PRO
HAC VICE APPLICATION
OF ATTORNEY MARK
B. BLOCKER

/

17
18

The pro hac vice application of Attorney Mark B. Blocker (Dkt. No. 34) is DENIED for

19

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

20

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

21

court of another State or the District of Columbia, specifying such bar” (emphasis added).

22

Filling out the pro hac vice form from the district court website such that it only identifies the

23

state of bar membership — such as “the bar of Illinois” — is inadequate under the local rule

24

because it fails to identify a specific court. While the application fee does not need to be paid

25

again, the application cannot be processed until a corrected form is submitted.

26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: October 19, 2015.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE