Shahrivar v. City of San Jose et al

Filing 172

ORDER. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/18/19. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

FARID SHAHRIVAR,

Case No. 10-cv-01029-RS

Plaintiff,
11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

v.

ORDER

12
13

CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15
16

This matter is on remand from the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that plaintiff’s previously

17

dismissed Sixth Amended Complaint included certain claims that were viable as to three of the

18

defendants. Plaintiff’s counsel has moved to withdraw, based on unspecified “professional

19

considerations” that allegedly require termination of the representation. The motion to withdraw

20

indicated plaintiff was unlikely to oppose, if given sufficient time to locate new counsel. Plaintiff

21

now reports he has been unable to obtain new counsel despite diligent efforts, and opposes

22

withdrawal of existing counsel for that reason. Plaintiff suggests appointment of pro bono counsel.

23

Good cause appearing, the matter will be referred by separate order to the Federal Pro

24

Bono Project for possible placement with pro bono counsel. A ruling on the motion to withdraw

25

will be deferred and the hearing set for September 26, 2019 is vacated pending the results of that

26

referral. Additional briefing on defendants’ motion for a more definite statement is also deferred

27

and the hearing set for November 7, 2019 is vacated pending further order.

28

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
3
4
5

Dated: September 18, 2019
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
<< SHORT ORDER TITLE >>
CASE NO. 10-cv-01029-RS

28
2