Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-02032/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-02032-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

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 1

 This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited.

Case No. C 05-02032 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD

(JFLC1)

**E-Filed 1/30/06**

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

MONICA RODRIGUEZ,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

AREVA T&D, INC.,

 Defendant.

Case Number C 05-02032 JF

ORDER1 GRANTING MOTION OF

PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL TO

WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF

RECORD

[Docket No. 15]

On April 5, 2005, Plaintiff Monica Rodriguez (“Rodriguez”) filed the instant action

against Defendant Areva T&D, Inc. in Santa Clara Superior Court. Rodriguez alleges claims for

pregnancy discrimination, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, and violation of

California Government Code § 12945.2. On May 18, 2005, Areva removed the instant action to

federal court.

On December 15, 2005, Plaintiff’s counsel, Robert David Baker (“Baker”), filed a motion

to withdraw as counsel of record on the ground that he has been unable to contact Rodriguez. In

his declaration, Baker states, “Beginning in October 2005 and culminating on November 4, 2005,

Case 5:05-cv-02032-JF Document 19 Filed 01/30/06 Page 1 of 4
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

2

Case No. C 05-02032 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD

(JFLC1)

Plaintiff has failed to keep appointments necessary to proceed with her case, including a

deposition scheduled for December 8, 2005.” Baker Decl. ¶ 4. Baker “left several messages,”

and on November 10, 2005, “mailed a letter to Plaintiff, wherein [he] stated that as a result of the

failure to communicate with [his] office, [he] would be withdrawing as her attorney of record and

advised her to seek other counsel if she wished to pursue this matter.” Id. Baker has not

received any response to this letter, nor has the letter been returned. Id. On November 10, 2005,

Baker sent a letter to Defendant’s counsel advising of his intent to move to withdraw as her

counsel of record. Neither Defendant nor Rodriguez has submitted opposition to Baker’s

motion.

Counsel shall not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of the Court after

reasonable advance written notice has been given to the client and to all other parties who have

appeared in the case. Civil L.R. 11-5 (a). In the Northern District of California, the conduct of

counsel is governed by the standards of professional conduct required of members of the State

Bar of California, including the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California. 

Elan Transdermal Limited v. Cygnus Therapeutic Systems, 809 F. Supp. 1383, 1387 (N.D. Cal.

1992). Under those standards, an attorney may request permission to withdraw in matters where

the client’s conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the attorney to represent the client

effectively. Cal. Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(C)(1)(d). Baker has notified

Rodriguez and opposing counsel, and Rodriguez’s failure to respond to Baker’s telephone

messages and letter have made it unreasonably difficult for Baker to represent Rodriguez. 

Accordingly, this Court will grant Baker’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record for

Rodriguez.

When withdrawal by an attorney is not accompanied by simultaneous appearance of

substitute counsel or agreement of the party to appear pro se, leave to withdraw may be subject to

the condition that papers may continue to be served on counsel for forwarding purposes, unless

and until the client appears by other counsel or pro se. Civil L.R. 11-5(b). Accordingly, the

Court will continue to serve papers on Baker until Rodriguez appears by other counsel or pro se,

or until the case is terminated.

Case 5:05-cv-02032-JF Document 19 Filed 01/30/06 Page 2 of 4
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

3

Case No. C 05-02032 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD

(JFLC1)

DATED: January 30, 2006

 

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 5:05-cv-02032-JF Document 19 Filed 01/30/06 Page 3 of 4
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

4

Case No. C 05-02032 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD

(JFLC1)

This Order has been served upon the following persons:

Robert David Baker attyatlaw@earthlink.net

Lisa Hamasaki lhamasaki@reedsmith.com

Douglas H. Riegelhuth Driegelhuth@reedsmith.com,

Catherine S. Ryan

Reed Smith LLP

435 Sixth Avenue

Pittsburgh, PA 15219

Monica Rodriguez

3343 Mount Logan Drive

San Jose, CA 95127

Case 5:05-cv-02032-JF Document 19 Filed 01/30/06 Page 4 of 4