Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_95-cv-02377/USCOURTS-cand-3_95-cv-02377-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UTHE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

HARRY ALLEN and AETRIUM,

INCORPORATED,

Defendants. /

No. C 95-02377 WHA

REQUEST FOR RESPONSE RE

MOTION PERMITTING

WITHDRAWAL AND

SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

Before the Court rules on plaintiff’s motion to withdraw and substitute counsel,

plaintiff’s counsel will please submit an explanation showing good cause for the substitution. 

The Court is concerned over the extreme age of the case and further concerned about the effect

of losing the history and knowledge of this case acquired by plaintiff’s original counsel and any

delay that will result from this substitution. Counsel’s response is due FRIDAY, MARCH 11 AT

NOON.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 8, 2016. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:95-cv-02377-WHA Document 214 Filed 03/08/16 Page 1 of 1