The Court holds that, although the District Court has jurisdiction to establish its own pro hac vice admission rules, pro hac vice appearances in the District Court shall count towards Supreme Court Rule 204(a)(4)'s lifetime limit of three pro hac vice appearances. The Court further holds that even if the minimum requirements of Rule 204(a)(4) are otherwise met, the Court possesses the discretion to deny pro hac vice admission for other reasons, such as failure to disclose prior pro hac vice admissions on the pro hac vice questionnaire or for violation of other court rules. Accordingly, the Court denies pro hac vice admission in BA No. 2010-0017 but, because the requirements for equitable waiver have been satisfied, declines to revoke the pro hac vice admission previously granted in BA No. 2009-0218.