ReactX, LLC v. Google, LLC

APPLICATIONS OF (1) JOSEPH M. DELICH, (2) STEPHEN LAGOS, (3) DEVIN (VELVEL) FREEDMAN, (4) NIRAJ THAKKER, (5) RILEY E. CLAFTON, AND (6) JOHN M. SUPER TO APPEAR AS COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE FOR PLAINTIFF REACTX, LLC

 

MOVING PARTIES: Joseph M. Delich, Stephen Lagos, Devin (Velvel) Freedman, Niraj Thakker, Riley E. Clafton, and John M. Super (as counsel 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 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.

Attorneys Joseph M. Delich, Stephen Lagos, Devin (Velvel) Freedman, Niraj Thakker, Riley E. Clafton, and John M. Super now move to be admitted pro hac vice as counsel for Plaintiff ReactX, LLC. [FN 1]  No oppositions were filed.  [FN 2] 

TENTATIVE RULING:

At the hearing, the moving attorneys must confirm payment of the mandatory application fee to the State Bar of California. Assuming they have, the Applications to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice will be GRANTED.

DISCUSSION:

Applications for Admission Pro Hac Vice

A. 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)).

B. Applications

Attorneys Delich, Lagos, Freedman, Thakker, Clafton, and Super move to be admitted pro hac vice for Plaintiff ReactX, LLC. 

Based on the attorney applications, the attorneys are not employed or residing within California (Declarations ¶ 1); the applications contain the necessary addresses (id.); the applications have the proper admission information for other courts where the attorneys are admitted (id. ¶ 2); and the attorneys are in good standing in those jurisdictions. (Id. ¶ 4.) All attorneys are to be associated with local counsel Jason G. Seasby of Irell and Manella LLP. 

In the preceding two years, Attorneys Delich, Freedman, and Thakker have each applied two times to appear pro hac vice in California courts. With the exception of another pending application by Attorney Delich in the Los Angeles Superior Court, all have been granted. Attorneys Lagos, Clafton, and Super have not applied to appear pro hac vice in California in the last two years. 

Considering the foregoing, the moving attorneys are eligible to appear pro hac vice.

The applications do not contain proof of payment of the mandatory application fees to the State Bar of California. At the hearing, the moving attorneys must confirm payment. Assuming they have, the Applications to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice will be GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   March 24, 2025 ___________________________________