Rogers v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2:19-cv-01581-APG-NJK. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20191015950
Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 08, 2019
Summary: Order Denying Motion to Appear Without Pro Hac Vice Application or Local Counsel [ECF No. 8] ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Plaintiff's counsel, Rand P. Nolen, has filed a motion to appear without applying for permission under the Local Rules of this District and without local counsel. ECF No. 8. Mr. Nolen relies upon Rule 2.1(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. That rule states "Any attorney of record in any action transferred
Summary: Order Denying Motion to Appear Without Pro Hac Vice Application or Local Counsel [ECF No. 8] ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Plaintiff's counsel, Rand P. Nolen, has filed a motion to appear without applying for permission under the Local Rules of this District and without local counsel. ECF No. 8. Mr. Nolen relies upon Rule 2.1(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. That rule states "Any attorney of record in any action transferred ..
More
Order Denying Motion to Appear Without Pro Hac Vice Application or Local Counsel
[ECF No. 8]
ANDREW P. GORDON, District Judge.
Plaintiff's counsel, Rand P. Nolen, has filed a motion to appear without applying for permission under the Local Rules of this District and without local counsel. ECF No. 8. Mr. Nolen relies upon Rule 2.1(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. That rule states "Any attorney of record in any action transferred under Section 1407 may continue to represent his or her client in any district court of the United States to which such action is transferred. Parties are not required to obtain local counsel." But this case was not transferred to this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1407. Rather, it was transferred here under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). See ECF No. 3 at 2:2-4 and 50. Thus, Rule 2.1(c) does not apply. Therefore, the motion (ECF No. 8) is denied without prejudice.
Source: Leagle
