Alejandro Picazo v. Randstad US, LP et al

Filing 20

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd conditionally granting 14 plaintiff's counsel's motion to withdraw; denying as moot 19 motion to appear by telephone. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court Northern District of California 11 ALEJANDRO PICAZO, 12 Case No.5:16-cv-06644-HRL Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 RANDSTAD US, LP, 15 Defendant. 16 ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW Re: Dkt. Nos. 14, 19 17 Plaintiff’s counsel move for permission to withdraw from representation. Defendant does 18 not oppose the motion. (Dkt. 16). Although the record indicates that plaintiff was given notice of 19 the present motion, the court has received no objection from him, and briefing on this matter is 20 closed. The motion is deemed suitable for determination without oral argument, and the January 21 10, 2017 hearing is vacated.1 Civ. L.R. 71-(b). Upon consideration of the moving papers, the 22 court conditionally grants the motions as follows: “Counsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of Court after written 23 24 notice has been given reasonably in advance to the client and to all other parties who have 25 appeared in the case.” Civ. L.R. 11-5(a). “In the Northern District of California, the conduct of 26 counsel is governed by the standards of professional conduct required of members of the State Bar 27 1 28 Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for leave to appear by telephone at the motion hearing (Dkt. 19) is denied as moot. 1 of California, including the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California.” Hill 2 Design Group v. Wang, No. C04-521 JF (RS), 2006 WL 3591206 at *4 (N.D. Cal., Dec. 11, 2006) 3 (citing Elan Transdermal Limited v. Cygnus Therapeutic Systems, 809 F. Supp. 1383, 1387 (N.D. 4 Cal.1992)). Those standards provide that an attorney may seek permission to withdraw if, among 5 other things, the client’s conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the attorney to represent the 6 client effectively. Id. (citing Cal. Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(C)(1)(d),(f)). 7 Here, movants request leave to withdraw, citing a breakdown in communication and 8 understanding as to the purpose and meaning of legal representation, as well as an irreparable 9 breakdown in the attorney-client relationship with plaintiff. (Dkt. 14-1, Otkupman Decl. ¶¶4-5). Finding sufficient grounds for withdrawal, the court grants the motion, subject to the condition 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 that papers may continue to be served on counsel for forwarding purposes, unless and until 12 plaintiff appears by other counsel or pro se. Civ. L.R. 11-5(b). 13 Plaintiff Alejandro Picazo is advised that he retains all of the obligations of a litigant. 14 Even if he is not represented by an attorney, he must (a) meet filing and other litigation deadlines, 15 (b) follow all court orders and applicable rules, and (c) make scheduled court appearances. To the 16 extent he remains without legal representation, plaintiff is encouraged to seek assistance of the 17 Federal Pro Se Program, located in Room 2070 on the Second Floor of the Federal Courthouse in 18 San Jose. Appointments may be made by (1) signing up in person at the Federal Pro Se Program 19 office or at The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, 152 N. 3rd Street, 3rd Floor, San Jose, CA; or 20 (2) by calling 408-297-1480. To the extent he has not already done so, plaintiff is also directed to 21 obtain a copy of the court’s Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, available on the court’s website 22 ( or from the Clerk’s Office. 23 SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: January 5, 2017 25 HOWARD R. LLOYD United States Magistrate Judge 26 27 28 2 1 2 5:16-cv-06644-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to: Michael Anderson Wahlander,,, 3 4 Michael Edward Harvey,, 5 Rita Ming-Yuen Leong 6 Roman Otkupman 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 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?