A Blog About Intellectual Property Litigation and the District of Delaware


Earlier this month Andrew wrote a post on Judge Connolly's new standing order requiring pro hac applicants to state whether a non-lawyer owns a stake in their firm.

This will always be the picture when no picture makes sense
This will always be the picture when no picture makes sense AI-Generated, displayed with permission

We're posting this as a reminder (and because I am too busy to do a real post) because yesterday Judge Connolly denied a pro hac motion for failure to comply:

ORAL ORDER re 6 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Danielle Vincenti Tully, Michael B. Powell, John T. Augelli and Michael A. Russo, for whom payment has been received. The motion is DENIED without prejudice to renew for failure to comply with Judge Connolly's Standing Order Regarding Pro Hac Vice Motions.

I assume that this will be the last such denial, now that the preeminent DE legal blog has flagged the issue for the second time. (take that boat news)

If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.

All

Similar Posts