Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05255/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05255-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

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

ED DAIE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

INTEL CORP. LONG TERM

DISABILITY PLAN,

Defendant. /

No. C 15-5255 WHA

ORDER DENYING PRO

HAC VICE APPLICATION

OF ATTORNEY NANCY B.

PRIDGEN

The pro hac vice application of Attorney Nancy B. Pridgen (Dkt. No. 14) is 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 Georgia” — 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: December 7, 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-05255-WHA Document 15 Filed 12/07/15 Page 1 of 1