Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-06644/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-06644-0/pdf.json

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

---

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ALEJANDRO PICAZO,

Plaintiff,

v.

RANDSTAD US, LP,

Defendant.

Case No.5:16-cv-06644-HRL 

ORDER CONDITIONALLY 

GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL’S

MOTION TO WITHDRAW

Re: Dkt. Nos. 14, 19

Plaintiff’s counsel move for permission to withdraw from representation. Defendant does 

not oppose the motion. (Dkt. 16). Although the record indicates that plaintiff was given notice of 

the present motion, the court has received no objection from him, and briefing on this matter is 

closed. The motion is deemed suitable for determination without oral argument, and the January 

10, 2017 hearing is vacated.1 Civ. L.R. 71-(b). Upon consideration of the moving papers, the 

court conditionally grants the motions as follows:

“Counsel 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.” Civ. 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 

 

1

Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for leave to appear by telephone at the motion hearing (Dkt. 19) is 

denied as moot.

Case 5:16-cv-06644-HRL Document 20 Filed 01/05/17 Page 1 of 3
2

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

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

Design Group v. Wang, No. C04-521 JF (RS), 2006 WL 3591206 at *4 (N.D. Cal., Dec. 11, 2006) 

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

Cal.1992)). Those standards provide that an attorney may seek permission to withdraw if, among

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

client effectively. Id. (citing Cal. Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(C)(1)(d),(f)).

Here, movants request leave to withdraw, citing a breakdown in communication and 

understanding as to the purpose and meaning of legal representation, as well as an irreparable

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 

that papers may continue to be served on counsel for forwarding purposes, unless and until 

plaintiff appears by other counsel or pro se. Civ. L.R. 11-5(b).

Plaintiff Alejandro Picazo is advised that he retains all of the obligations of a litigant. 

Even if he is not represented by an attorney, he must (a) meet filing and other litigation deadlines, 

(b) follow all court orders and applicable rules, and (c) make scheduled court appearances. To the 

extent he remains without legal representation, plaintiff is encouraged to seek assistance of the 

Federal Pro Se Program, located in Room 2070 on the Second Floor of the Federal Courthouse in 

San Jose. Appointments may be made by (1) signing up in person at the Federal Pro Se Program 

office or at The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, 152 N. 3rd Street, 3rd Floor, San Jose, CA; or 

(2) by calling 408-297-1480. To the extent he has not already done so, plaintiff is also directed to 

obtain a copy of the court’s Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, available on the court’s website 

(http://cand.uscourts.gov) or from the Clerk’s Office.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 5, 2017

HOWARD R. LLOYD

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:16-cv-06644-HRL Document 20 Filed 01/05/17 Page 2 of 3
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

5:16-cv-06644-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:

Michael Anderson Wahlander mwahlander@seyfarth.com, jdoctor@seyfarth.com, 

lallen@seyfarth.com, SFOCalendar@seyfarth.com

Michael Edward Harvey mharvey@seyfarth.com, mhensel@seyfarth.com, 

sfocalendar@seyfarth.com

Rita Ming-Yuen Leong rita@olfla.com

Roman Otkupman roman@olfla.com

Case 5:16-cv-06644-HRL Document 20 Filed 01/05/17 Page 3 of 3