ReactX, LLC v. Google, LLC

APPLICATION OF NATHANIEL REGENOLD TO APPEAR AS COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE

 

MOVING PARTIES: Counsel Nathanial Regenold (for Plaintiff ReactX, LLC)

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiff ReactX, LLC alleges that Defendant Google, LLC misappropriated and/or misused ReactX’s intellectual property in the development of Google’s ReactX’s Confidential Information, its Platform, and/or its proprietary source code in a variety of Google products and platforms, including but not limited to, AdSense “Auto Ads”; Google Ad Manager; Google Ad Exchange; Google Ads; and DV360, all without compensation to ReactX.

Plaintiff ReactX requests the Court grant the application of Nathanial Regenold to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Counsel’s Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice, unless waived.  

DISCUSSION:

Application for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Legal Standard

California Rules of Court Rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear pro hac vice in this State by way of written application upon notice by mail to all interested parties, as well as service on the State Bar in San Francisco with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a resident of California, does not work in California, and does not perform regular or substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40).

The application must state: (1) The applicant's residence and office address;  (2) The courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission;  (3) That the applicant is a licensee in good standing in those courts;  (4) That the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court;  (5) The title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and (6)  The name, address, and telephone number of the active licensee of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d)).

Analysis

Based on the Application and attached Declaration, Counsel Regenold is not employed or residing within California (Regenold Decl. ¶ 7); the attorney has not appeared in California in the last two years (Decl. ¶ 6); the application contains the necessary addresses (Decl. ¶ 2); the application has the proper admission information for other courts where the attorney is admitted (Decl. ¶ 3); and the attorney is in good standing (Decl. ¶ 4).  Counsel Regenold is to be associated with local counsel Paul S. Chan, Ekwan E. Rhow, and Kate S. Shin. (Decl. ¶ 8.)  Chan attests the application fee has been paid on Regenold’s behalf to the State Bar of California.  (Chan Decl. ¶ 2.)

Accordingly, Counsel’s Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED.

Moving parties to give notice, unless waived.  

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   January 19, 2023 ___________________________________

Randolph M. Hammock

Judge of the Superior Court

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept49@lacourt.org by no later than 5
 :00 p.m. the day before the hearing.  All interested parties must be copied on the email.  It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.