Garcia v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 36

ORDER re motion to withdraw as attorney; order continuing briefing schedule on motion to dismiss. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 4/1/2014. (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

DEBRA GARCIA,
Plaintiff,

8
9

v.
WELLS FARGO BANK N.A., et al.,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C 13-3670 PJH
ORDER RE MOTION TO WITHDRAW
AS ATTORNEY; ORDER CONTINUING
BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTION TO
DISMISS

Defendants.
_______________________________/

12
13

Before the court is a motion to withdraw as attorney, filed by plaintiff’s current

14

counsel (the Mellen Law Firm) on March 4, 2014. The Mellen Law Firm seeks to withdraw

15

as counsel and to substitute plaintiff Debra Garcia in pro per. Plaintiff Garcia has not filed

16

an opposition to the motion, nor has she filed a notice of non-opposition.1 The Mellen Law

17

Firm’s motion to withdraw is set for hearing on April 16, 2014.

18

Because plaintiff Garcia has not yet responded to the Mellen Law Firm’s motion, the

19

court directs her to file either an opposition brief or a notice of non-opposition by April 9,

20

2014. If plaintiff Garcia files a notice of non-opposition, the court will grant the Mellen Law

21

Firm’s motion, and plaintiff Garcia will be substituted in pro per. Otherwise, the April 16

22

hearing on the Mellen Law Firm’s motion to withdraw as counsel shall go forward, as

23

scheduled.

24

The court also notes that defendant Wells Fargo has filed a motion to dismiss. The

25

deadline for opposing Wells Fargo’s motion is April 7, 2014. Because the motion to

26

withdraw must be resolved before any opposition to Wells Fargo’s motion can be filed, the

27
28

1

While the Mellen Law Firm has filed its own notice of non-opposition, that notice does
not indicate, one way or the other, whether plaintiff Garcia herself opposes the motion.

1

court hereby continues the briefing schedule on Wells Fargo’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff

2

shall have until May 7, 2014 to file an opposition to Wells Fargo’s motion, and Wells Fargo

3

shall have until May 14, 2014 to file a reply. The hearing date on Wells Fargo’s motion to

4

dismiss, currently scheduled for June 4, 2014, shall remain unchanged.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 1, 2014
______________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2