Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01329/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01329-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEREK MATTHEWS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEMITA PINCHBACK, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:22–cv–1329–DAD–KJN

ORDER GRANTING ATTORNEY 

WITHDRAWAL; APPOINTING COUNSEL; 

STAYING CASE; AND RECLASSIFYING 

CASE AS PC CASE

(ECF Nos. 21, 34.)

Currently before the court are two motions by plaintiff’s counsel to withdraw from the 

case as counsel of record.1

 (ECF Nos. 21, 34.) 

A district court has discretion to permit or deny an attorney's withdrawal. See Huntington 

Learning Ctrs., Inc. v. Educ. Gateway, Inc., 2009 WL 2337863, at *1 (C.D. Cal. July 28, 2009). 

Courts often consider four factors for withdrawal requests: “(1) the reasons why withdrawal is 

sought; (2) the prejudice withdrawal may cause to other litigants; (3) the harm withdrawal might 

cause to the administration of justice; and (4) the degree to which withdrawal will delay the 

resolution of the case.” Id. After discussing the matter with plaintiff, his current counsel, and 

defendants at a February 7, 2023 hearing, the court finds it appropriate to permit Jennifer 

Bandlow and George Tourkow to withdraw from this case.

1 These motions were referred to the undersigned by the district judge. (ECF Nos. 24, 39.) See 28 

U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a).

Case 2:22-cv-01329-DJC-CSK Document 44 Filed 02/08/23 Page 1 of 3
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

However, the court is aware of the remaining factors, including the prejudice to the other 

litigants, harm to the administration of justice, and potential delay caused by counsels’ 

withdrawal. To rectify these issues, the court finds it appropriate to appoint counsel for plaintiff. 

This appointment is for a limited basis, for counsel to handle litigating the pending and 

potentially-upcoming motions. (See ECF Nos. 20 (motion to dismiss), 30 (motion for leave to 

file early motion for summary judgment).) The court’s pro bono coordinator, Sujean Park, is 

directed to find counsel for plaintiff for these pending motions (as well as the potentially-pending 

summary judgment motion).

2

 Should plaintiff require more information related to the 

appointment, Ms. Park can be reached at spark@caed.uscourts.gov or via U.S. Mail (501 I St., 

Sacramento, CA, 95831, c/o Sujean Park).

Given that it may take some time for the pro bono coordinator to find counsel and have 

that counsel get up to speed on the case, the court finds it appropriate to stay the case until such 

time as new counsel is fully briefed and ready to proceed.

Finally, in resolving this matter for the district judge, the court is aware that this case was 

initially misclassified as a regular civil case. Given the allegations in the complaint, the case 

should have been designated as a prisoner case (PC). Therefore, the clerk of the court will be 

directed to reclassify this case as a PC case. The effect of this reclassification is that, under Local 

Rule 302(c)(17), all pretrial matters are referred to a magistrate judge, with any dispositive 

matters being resolved on findings and recommendations. Thus, upon redesignation, the 

undersigned, rather than the district judge, shall be the one to resolve the pending motion to 

dismiss and pending motion for leave to file summary judgment. Once the stay is lifted, the 

parties shall re-notice these pending motions before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 

230(l). 

///

///

2 Should plaintiff’s case survive these dispositive motions, appointed counsel will certainly be 

allowed to continue with the case. However, Ms. Bandlow also informed the court that she has 

been in contact with other counsel that may be available to represent plaintiff after the resolution 

of these motions. Ms. Bandlow shall provide those names to Ms. Park at the email address above.

Case 2:22-cv-01329-DJC-CSK Document 44 Filed 02/08/23 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Motions to Withdraw as Counsel (ECF Nos. 21, 34) are GRANTED;

2. Jennifer A. Bandlow and George D. Tourkow of SoCal Justice Law Group, P.C., are 

hereby RELIEVED as counsel of record for Plaintiff Derek Matthews;

3. Plaintiff is appointed counsel for a limited purpose. The court’s pro bono coordinator is 

directed to find an attorney to represent plaintiff for the limited purpose of representing 

him through resolution of the pending motion to dismiss, pending motion for leave to file 

early summary judgment, and the potential motion for summary judgment;

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to reclassify this case as a prisoner case (PC); 

5. Given that reclassification effectively refers all pending motions to the undersigned, the 

court now VACATES all pending hearing dates with this court, including the hearing 

currently set before District Judge Drozd on 3/7/2023 (see ECF No. 25); and

6. This case is STAYED until such time as new counsel has entered and ready to proceed 

with the pending motions. At that time, new counsel may request the court lift the stay, 

and the court will then proceed with the pending motions pursuant to Local Rule 230(l). 

Should counsel not be ready to proceed within 60 days of this order, the parties are 

directed to file a status update with the undersigned indicating the reason for the delays 

and required time to be ready to proceed.

Dated: February 8, 2023

matt.1329

Case 2:22-cv-01329-DJC-CSK Document 44 Filed 02/08/23 Page 3 of 3