Nelson LAC v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

Filing 140

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 12/7/2016 DENYING 139 Request for Reinstatement by Aldon Louis Bolanos without prejudice. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-00523-KJM-DB

NELSON LAC,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC,
Defendant.

16
17
18

This matter is before the court on a request by former plaintiff’s counsel, Mr.

19

Aldon Bolanos, for reinstatement to practice in this district. On September 3, 2016, this court

20

suspended Mr. Bolanos from practice in this district for a minimum of sixty days. Order

21

September 6, 2016, ECF No. 120. The suspension order expressly requires that before Mr.

22

Bolanos can be reinstated, the court must accept his pre-reinstatement declaration that explains

23

the steps he has taken to familiarize himself with this court’s local rules and all other rules of

24

professional conduct applicable to practicing attorneys. Id. at 2.

25

Mr. Bolanos mailed the court a letter dated October 28, 2016, in which he

26

requested reinstatement to practice in this district, and has followed up with emails. The court is

27

docketing scanned copies of these communications concurrently with filing this order. The court

28

DENIES Mr. Bolanos’ request for the following reasons.
1

1

First, Mr. Bolanos has not filed the required sworn declaration that explains the

2

steps he has taken to familiarize himself with the local rules. Rather, Mr. Bolanos makes fleeting

3

reference to his efforts in his informal letter to the court. As such, his request does not comply

4

with the instructions outlined in the court’s suspension order. ECF No. 120 at 2.

5

Second, despite the court’s instruction to demonstrate familiarity with the local

6

rules and all applicable rules of professional conduct, ECF No. 120 at 2, Mr. Bolanos’ request for

7

reinstatement is vague and incomplete; for example, it does not reference Federal Rule of Civil

8

Procedure 11 or other federal rules of practice.

9

Lastly, an additional basis for Mr. Bolanos’ request appears to be moot. Mr.

10

Bolanos explains his motive in seeking reinstatement is to continue to represent his client in Singh

11

v. Pooni, currently pending before another judge of this court. The court notes however that as of

12

September 11, 2016, that client is represented by new counsel. See Case No. 2:14-cv-2146, Not.

13

of Appearance, ECF No. 83.

14
15

Accordingly, the court DENIES Mr. Bolanos’ request for reinstatement, without
prejudice.

16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
DATED: December 7, 2016.
18
19
20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2