Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. et al
Motion to Withdraw as Attorney and Notice of Withdrawal as Counsel by Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. by Plaintiff Apple, Inc., Counter Defendant Apple, Inc.. Response due 10/3/2011. (Peterson, James)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Case No. 10-CV-661-BBC
MOTOROLA INC. and MOTOROLA
MOTION TO WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL
AND NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL
BY GODFREY & KAHN, S.C.
The attorneys of Godfrey & Kahn, S.C., including James D. Peterson and Bryan J. Cahill,
move to withdraw as counsel to the plaintiff, Apple Inc. The grounds for this motion are that a
potential conflict of interest has arisen involving Godfrey & Kahn, S.C., and the plaintiff has
engaged new local counsel. Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. is also filing motions to withdraw in Case
Nos. 10-CV-662 and 11-CV-178.
On September 19, 2011, Catherine Cetrangolo, of Boardman, Suhr, Curry & Field LLP
filed a notice of appearance in Case No. 10-CV-662 (Dkt. No. 160) on behalf of the plaintiffs.
We expect that Ms. Cetrangolo will file a notice of appearance in this case as it becomes
necessary. The plaintiffs will continue to be represented by counsel from Tensegrity Law Group
LLC, Covington & Burling LLP; and Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP. Because the plaintiffs will
continue to be represented by qualified counsel, this motion should cause no prejudice to the
Accordingly, Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. requests that the Court grant this motion to withdraw
as counsel. All counsel are hereby notified that the attorneys and staff of Godfrey & Kahn, S.C.
should no longer receive copies of documents filed or served in this matter.
Dated: September 26, 2011
/s/ James Donald Peterson
James Donald Peterson
State Bar No. 1022819
GODFREY & KAHN, S.C.
One East Main Street, Suite 500
P.O. Box 2719
Madison, WI 53701-2719
Telephone: (608) 257-3911
Facsimile: (608) 257-0609
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?