O'Shea et al v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc.

Filing 21

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re: 14 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice for Rafey Balabanian. Show Cause Response due by 5/26/2016.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 5/19/16. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/19/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KEVIN O'SHEA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 16-cv-01668-JSW

v.
24 HOUR FITNESS USA, INC.,
Defendant.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE PRO
HAC VICE APPLICATION OF RAFEY
S. BALABANIAN, ESQ.
Re: Dkt. No. 14

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq., has filed an application for admission pro hac vice. This
Court’s Civil Local Rule 11-3(b) provides:
Disqualification from Pro Hac Vice Appearance. Unless
authorized by an Act of Congress or by an order of the assigned
judge, an applicant is not eligible for permission to practice pro hac
vice if the applicant:
(1) Resides in the State of California; or
(2) Is regularly engaged in the practice of law in the State of
California. This disqualification shall not be applicable if the pro
hac vice applicant (i) has been a resident of California for less than
one year; (ii) has registered with, and completed all required
applications for admission to, the State Bar of California; and
(3) Has officially registered to take or is awaiting his or her results
from the California State Bar exam.
N.D. Cal. Civil L.R. 11-3(b).
With regard to Mr. Balabanian’s residence, the address of record listed on Mr.

25

Balabanian’s pro hac vice application is in San Francisco, California. The telephone number of

26

record listed on Mr. Balabanian’s application is [phone], which is a San Francisco,

27

California number. Additionally, the Court takes judicial notice of the fact that Mr. Balabanian’s

28

telephone number listed on his law firm’s web page is [phone], which is also in San

1
2

Fra
ancisco, Cali
ifornia. See https://www
w.edelson.co
om/team/rafe
ey-s-balaban
nian/
With re
egard to whe
ether Mr. Bal
labanian is r
regularly eng
gaged in the practice of l in the
law

3

Sta of Califor
ate
rnia, a search of this Cou
h
urt’s electron filing system indicat that Mr. B
nic
tes
Balabanian

4

is listed as an attorney in fi cases, in
l
a
ifty
ncluding this case, filed i this Court between 20 and the
s
in
t
008

5

pre
esent. The Court is not aware of whe
C
a
ether Mr. Ba
alabanian practices in ot
ther federal o state
or

6

cou in the St of Califo
urts
tate
ornia.

7

Accord
dingly, Plaint
tiffs are HER
REBY ORD
DERED TO S
SHOW CAU why the Court
USE
e

8

sho
ould not deny Mr. Balabanian’s appl
lication for a
admission pr hac vice p
ro
pursuant to C
Civil Local

9

Ru 11-3(b). See generall Ang v. Bim Bakerie USA, Inc., No. 13-cv-01196-WHO 2015 WL
ule
ly
mbo
es
,
O,
147
74866, ** 2- (N.D. Cal Jan. 14, 20
-3
l.
015) (overrul
ling objectio to pro ha vice appli
ons
ac
ication);

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Gu
uguni v. Cher
rtoff, No. C-08-1850 JL, 2008 WL 2
,
2080788, * 1 (N.D. Cal. 2008) (vaca
ating order

12

gra
anting applic
cation to app pro hac vice).
pear

13

By May 26, 2016, Plaintiffs sha either file a response to this order to show ca
y
P
all
e
r
ause or

14

wit
thdraw Mr. Balabanian’s pro hac vic applicatio If Plainti elect to f a respon to the
B
s
ce
on.
iffs
file
nse

15

ord to show cause, Defen
der
c
ndant may re
espond to Pla
aintiffs’ filin by June 2 2016. By June 9,
ng
2,

16

201 Plaintiffs may file a reply to any response fil by Defen
16,
s
led
ndant. The m
matter shall b submitted
be
d

17

upo the filing of Plaintiffs reply, unle the Cour schedules a hearing.
on
s’
ess
rt

18
19

S
RED.
IT IS SO ORDER
Da
ated: May 19 2016
9,

20
21
JE
EFFREY S. W
WHITE
Un
nited States D
District Judg
ge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2