Unocal Pipeline Company v. BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., Conoco Phillips Transportation Alaska, Inc., and Exonmobile Pipeline Co.

                                      COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
                                 FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

                                         ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number:             01-15-00266-CV
Style:                    Unocal Pipeline Co. v. BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., ConocoPhillips
                          Transportation Alaska, Inc. and ExxonMobil Pipeline Co.
Date motions filed*:      September 3, 2015
Type of motions:          Motions to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Lara E. Romansic and Steven G.
                          Reed
Parties filing motions: Appellees BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., ConocoPhillips Transportation
                          Alaska, Inc., and ExxonMobil Pipeline Co.
Document to be filed:     N/A

Is appeal accelerated?       No.

Ordered that motions are:

          Granted
          Denied
          Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)
          Other: _____________________________________
          The motions to appear pro hac vice by non-resident attorneys Lara E. Romansic and
          Steven G. Reed are denied without prejudice to refiling with the required motions in
          support by a Texas resident attorney. See TEX. RULES GOVERN. BAR ADM’N, RULE
          XIX(b) (2015) (“The motion of the non-resident attorney seeking permission to
          participate in Texas proceedings must be accompanied by motion of the resident
          practicing Texas attorney with whom the non-resident attorney will be associated in the
          proceeding of a particular cause. . . .”).

Judge's signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes
                   

Date: February 15, 2015


November 7, 2008 Revision