Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03802/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03802-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WRI WEST GATE SOUTH, L.P.,

Plaintiff,

v.

RELIANCE MEDIAWORKS (USA) INC., 

et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-03802-JD 

ORDER STRIKING NOTICES OF 

ATTORNEY WITHDRAWAL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 96, 97, 98

All three of the attorneys on record as counsel for defendants have filed “notices of 

withdrawal as counsel.” Dkt. Nos. 96, 97, 98. Under Civil Local Rule 11-5(a), “[c]ounsel may 

not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of Court after written notice has been given 

reasonably in advance to the client and to all other parties who have appeared in the case.” The 

Court strikes the notices for failure to comply with Rule 11-5.

If counsel wish to withdraw, they must file a noticed motion requesting permission to do 

so. Any motion filed must indicate whether the clients agree to the withdrawal, as evidenced by a 

signed declaration from the client saying so. The motion must also address whether substitute 

counsel will be appearing, and if not, what conditions the Court should impose to ensure the 

parties remain apprised of developments in this action in the meantime. See Civil L.R. 11-5(b). 

To be clear, attorneys Simarjit Kaur, Ameet Matharu and Sneha Pathak are not relieved and will 

remain as counsel of record for defendants Reliance Mediaworks (USA) Inc. and Reliance 

Mediaworks, Ltd. in this action until the Court orders otherwise.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 6, 2015

________________________

JAMES DONATO

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-03802-JD Document 100 Filed 11/06/15 Page 1 of 1