Order | Filed: June 23, 2026
| Entered: June 23, 2026
Flick Intelligence, LLC v. Innovid Inc.
Patent | New York Southern
Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice Order on Motion for Conference
ORDER denying 21 Motion for William P. Ramey, III to Appear Pro Hac Vice; denying as moot 22 Motion for Conference: This case was filed on March 19, 2026. Dkt. No. 1. On March 24, 2026, the Court issued an order setting an initial pretrial conference for May 27, 2026. Dkt. No. 8. On April 8, 2026, that date was adjourned at the parties' request, to June 24, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. Dkt. No. 12. One day before that conference, which had been set for two-and-a-half months, Mr. Ramey filed his motion for admission pro hac vice. Dkt. No. 21. Plainly, despite Mr. Hoffman signing the other filings for Plaintiff to date, Mr. Ramey is lead counsel, as he asserts in his pro hac vice motion that "[m]y client would be required to find new counsel to file if the pro hac vice motion is not granted." Id. at 2. To compound matters, mere hours before the end of the business day immediately preceding the conference (which, again, was scheduled some 10 weeks ago), Mr. Ramey filed a request to participate in the conference remotely, which the Court ordinarily does not permit. No explanation for Mr. Ramey's inability to appear for an in-person conference scheduled over two months ago was provided. Pro hac vice admission is intended for counsel who would otherwise be qualified to be admitted to the bar of this Court, but need admission only for a particular motion or a particular case. As set forth in great detail by Judge Furman in VDPP, LLC v. Olympus America Inc., 25-CV-09243, Dkt. No. 30 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11, 2026), Mr. Ramey falls short of the standards for full admission to the bar of this Court, and his conduct this far in this case gives the Court no reason to believe that his fitness for admission (including for pro hac vice admission) has improved in the intervening 3 months. Accordingly, Mr. Ramey's motion for admission pro hac vice is DENIED. His letter motion to appear remotely for the June 24 Conference is DENIED AS MOOT. Because by his own admission, the Plaintiff will need new counsel if Mr. Ramey's pro hac vice motion was denied, the conference scheduled for June 24 is ADJOURNED sine die. Plaintiff, through Mr. Hoffman, is hereby ORDERED to submit a letter to the Court by no later than July 14, 2026, indicating whether they have obtained new counsel or whether they are proceeding with Mr. Hoffman as their actual lead counsel. The Court will reschedule the initial pretrial conference for an appropriate date after receiving that letter. (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Margaret M. Garnett)(Text Only Order) (Garnett, Margaret)