Free Motion for Leave to Appear - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

· _ Case 3:03-cv—OO993-S@ Document 21 -2 Filed 10/20/@3 Page 1 of 3
,,».q/III} I
R E V E D THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT I
/ FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I
ZGII} VCI ZG A CIF 3'I
CONAIR CORP. ) I
) IQ ·' [ I I
Piamarr, ) l “
V. ) Civil Action Number: 03-CV—993 (SRU)
I I
L&N SALES and MARKETING, INC. ) I
) I
Defendants )
t““—‘—"—‘* I
I
AFFIDAVIT OF ARTHUR H. SEIDEL, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF
APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
I
Arthur H. Seidel, Esq., in lieu of oath or affidavit, certifies that:
I
1. I am of counsel with the law firm of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, which I
maintains an office at One Logan Square, 18th & Cherry Sts., Philadelphia PA 19103. I
make this certification in support of Defendant L&N Sales and Marketing, Inc.’s I
("Defendant") application for my admission pm hac vice pursuant to Local Civil Rule
I
2(d).. I
2. I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the Commonwealth of
Pemisylvania. I was admitted to practice before the Courts of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania in 1956. I have also been admitted to practice before the following Courts:
I
Court Year admitted
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 1949
I
United States District Court for the District of Columbia 1949
United States District Court for the Eastern District of I
Pennsylvania 1954 I

I
“ *. Case 3:03-cv-00993-S@ Document 21 -2 Filed 10/20/@3 Page 2 of 3 I
2 ` Yrr·~ r¤m¤r¢»¤
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit I 1 954- I
New York Court of Appeals
1957 {
United States District court for the Eastern District of New
York 1957 I
United States District court for the Southern District of New I
York 1957
United Stated Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 1968
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 1977
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1982
United States Court of Claims 1988
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1991 I
i
United States District Court for the Eastern District of l
Michigan 1993
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 1997
I 3. I am not currently suspended, disbarred or prohibited from practicing in
any court.
l
4. There are no grievances or criminal matters pending against me.
5. Defendant has requested that I represent it in this action.
. . . . E
6. It is respectfully submitted that there is good cause for my admission pro I
I
hac vice. This action involves a complex intellectual property matter involving I
allegations of patent infringement. It is anticipated that the services of a number of
attorneys at my firm will be required due to the complex nature of this matter and the I
possibility of extensive discovery. l
2» I
- I
rl

. _ _ Case 3303-cv-00993-SGRQ Document 21 -2 Filed 10/20/2003 Page 3 of 3
., _ , x,. O
7. I have reviewed the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court
for the District of Connecticut including, but not limited to, the provisions of 3,
Discipline of Attorneys, and the Rules of Professional Conduct referenced therein, and N
shall comply with said rules, including all disciplinary Rules.
8. I respectfully request that I be admitted pro hac vice for the purpose of i
appearing, participating in, and representing Defendant in this matter. I
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. Iam aware that if any
of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
l
Date: 5 { 'LGQ pg,
Arthur H. Seidel Esq. R
l
l
1
l
l
l
l
`
l
l
E