Posted On: 06/30/2016 9:19:29 AM
Post# of 72445

Thanks for the replies/explanation re: pro hac vice. I do remember Sullivan filing as such and we are still operating on the same case docket no. I wasn't sure if I'd missed something. Like I said, just hoping there isn't some technical loophole. Sounds like no. Dane probably has it right TSATWASWS. It's about all they've got at this point.

