I don’t have access to all of the documents filed… yet, but I’ll update you on what I know so far.

On the fifth of January, there was a pro hac vice application, which appears to have been granted on the sixth. The term pro hac vice is latin for “for this turn”, and is usually used when you want to bring in an attorney to participate in a case, but who is not licensed to act in the specific jurisdiction in which the case is transpiring. The attorney in question provides a statement from her own bar association that she’s a member in good standing, and pays a fee to the local bar association. Even so it isn’t guaranteed that the court will agree.

So it appears someone was admitted to the case as an attorney of record. I’m guessing it was on Ozimals’ behalf, though counsel for Amaretto could have brought a hand in from another jurisdiction. I think it is more likely that Ozimals’ brought in legal representation from wherever it is that they’re located. [Ozimals says that it wasn’t them. Thanks, Candy Cerveau.]

On the eleventh of January (that’s Tuesday this week), there was a status conference between the judge and the parties to the case. It isn’t unusual for these to be handled via a conference call. Quite what went on at the status conference, I’m not sure but apparently the judge issued an order on Tuesday. To which party or parties, and concerning exactly what, I am unsure at the moment.

That’s where we’re up to, until or unless someone with PACER access (or one of the parties to the case) digs out some documents I can look at – or notification arrives that there are new documents in the case.

Tags: , , , , , , ,



Got a news tip or a press-release? Send it to [email protected].
  • Support us

    Writing is my day job. Site advertising pays for the hosting, but nothing else. Help keep us in coffee and keyboards

    ... or donate in Second Life at this location.

  • ...or use Flattr

  • Read previous post:
    Close