Infante v. Luxottica Retail North America

Filing 13

ORDER DENYING PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY ANDREW FRIEDMAN by Hon. William Alsup denying 8 Motion for Pro Hac Vice.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2017)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

KATHLEEN INFANTE, as an individual
and on behalf of all others similarly
situated,

12
13
14

Plaintiffs,
ORDER DENYING PRO
HAC VICE APPLICATION
OF ATTORNEY ANDREW
FRIEDMAN

v.
LUXOTTICA RETAIL,
Defendant.
/

15
16

No. C 17-05145 WHA

The pro hac vice application of Attorney Andrew Friedman (Dkt. No. 8) is DENIED for

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

state of bar membership — such as “the bar of the District of Columbia” — is inadequate under

22

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

23

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

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

Dated: September 15, 2017.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE