The fellow in question is Siddharth Velamoor.
He worked for Perkins Coie out of their Seattle office.
His specialty is apparently product liability.
http://www.martindale.com/Siddharth-Velamoor/33735949-lawyer.htm
Judge Carter ruled exactly as predicted by virtually every individual with legal experience who weighed in on this issue.
The appearance of impropriety? The appearance, perhaps. But only an appearance and a weak one at that. Even a cursory examination of the facts clears the matter up.
The claim that hiring a clerk from among the many hundreds, if not thousands, of associates who work for a nationwide legal firm that also handles legal matters for BHO somehow provides evidence of actual impropriety is groundless.
Especially when the individual in question apparently specializes in a field of law that is entirely unrelated to the issued at hand.
If he doesn't work in any of the areas for which the company serves Obama, there isn't even the appearance of impropriety. It's just one more red herring spun out of thin air by the birther crowd to avoid facing the fact that this is all nonsense.