Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ratner v. Martel Electronics Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


January 15, 2008

CARY RATNER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARTEL ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lindsay, Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Before the court is a motion to permit Brett Schatz to appear pro hac vice on behalf of the defendant Martel Electronics Corporation ("Martel"). The pro se plaintiff, Cary Ratner, opposes the motion on the ground that Mr. Schatz is representing Martel in an action pending in the Western District of Washington, which also seeks to invalidate the plaintiff's patent. The plaintiff's argument is not a basis to deny Mr. Schatz' application. Local Civil Rule 1.3 provides:

"[a] member in good standing of the bar of any state or of any United States District Court may be permitted to argue or try a particular case in whole or in part as counsel or advocate, upon motion and upon filing with the Clerk of the District Court a certificate of the court for each of the states in which the applicant is a member of the bar, which . . . states that the applicant is a member in good standing of the bar of that state court.

Mr Schatz has submitted a certificate of good standing from the State of Ohio and has indicated in a sworn affidavit that there are no pending disciplinary proceedings against him in any state or federal court. Accordingly, Mr. Schatz has satisfied the requirements of Local Rule 1.3 and his motion is granted.

SO ORDERED:

ARLENE R. LINDSAY United States Magistrate Judge

20080115

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.