Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04068/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04068-30/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:0401 Labor Management Disclosure 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFF BOWMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.,

Defendant. / 

JOSEPH GLASS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C-04-3525 MMC

ORDER DENYING BOWMAN

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION REQUESTING

REFERRAL OF ATTORNEYS LOVELL

STEWART HALEBIAN LLP AND JOHN

HALEBIAN TO STANDING COMMITTEE

ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT;

VACATING HEARING

(Docket Nos. 170, 185)

No. C-06-4068 MMC

ORDER DENYING GLASS PLAINTIFFS’

MOTION TO REFER THE LAW FIRM OF

LOVELL STEWART HALEBIAN LLP

AND ATTORNEY JOHN HALEBIAN TO

THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT PURSUANT

TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 11-6; VACATING

HEARING

(Docket Nos. 249, 272)

Before the Court is (1) the Bowman plaintiffs’ “Motion Requesting Referral of

Attorneys Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP and John Halebian to Standing Committee on

Professional Conduct,” filed February 27, 2007; and (2) the Glass plaintiffs’ “Motion to

Refer the Law Firm of Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP and Attorney John Halebian to the

Standing Committee on Professional Conduct Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 11-6,” filed

March 1, 2007. Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP and John Halebian have filed a single

opposition to the two motions; the Bowman and Glass plaintiffs have filed separate replies. 

Having reviewed the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motions, the Court

finds the matters appropriate for decision without oral argument, see Civil L.R. 7-1(b),

Case 3:06-cv-04068-MMC Document 286 Filed 05/01/07 Page 1 of 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

2

hereby VACATES the May 4, 2007 hearing, and rules as follows.

Civil Local Rule 11-6 provides, in relevant part: “In the event that a Judge has cause

to believe that an attorney has engaged in unprofessional conduct, the Judge may . . .

[r]efer the matter to the Court’s Standing Committee on Professional Conduct[.]” See Civil

L.R. 11-6(a). Although the issues raised in the instant motions warranted further inquiry,

the Court is satisfied with the explanations set forth in the Declaration of John Halebian and

finds the conduct described in the instant motions, although arguably overzealous, is not of

such character as to justify referral to the Standing Committee on Professional Conduct.

Accordingly, the motions are hereby DENIED.

This order terminates Docket Nos. 170 and 185 in Case No. 04-3525, and Docket

Nos. 249 and 278 in Case No. 06-4068.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 1, 2007 MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-04068-MMC Document 286 Filed 05/01/07 Page 2 of 2