Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02788/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02788-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ILLUMINA, INC., and ILLUMINA

CAMBRIDGE LTD.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

QIAGEN, N.V., QIAGEN GmbH,

QIAGEN GAITHERSBURG, INC.,

QIAGEN SCIENCES, LLC, QIAGEN

INC. (USA), QIAGEN REDWOOD CITY,

INC., and INTELLIGENT BIOSYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendants. /

No. C 16-2788 WHA

ORDER DENYING PRO

HAC VICE APPLICATIONS OF

ATTORNEYS ROBERT B.

BARON, JR., AND MARC S.

SEGAL

The pro hac vice applications of Attorney Robert B. Baron, Jr. (Dkt. No. 40) and

Attorney Marc S. Segal (Dkt. No. 41) ares DENIED for failing to comply with Local Rule 11-3. 

The local rule requires that an applicant certify that “he or she is an active member in good

standing of the bar of a United States Court or of the highest court of another State or the

District of Columbia, specifying such bar” (emphasis added). Filling out the pro hac vice form

from the district court website such that it only identifies the state of bar membership — such as

“the bar of Pennsylvania” — is inadequate under the local rule because it fails to identify a

specific court. While the application fee does not need to be paid again, the application cannot

be processed until a corrected form is submitted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 30, 2016. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:16-cv-02788-WHA Document 43 Filed 06/30/16 Page 1 of 1