Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00696/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00696-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Scott Johnson
Plaintiff
Mardan, Inc.
Defendant
Saeed Zarakani
Defendant

Document Text:

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

SCOTT JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAEED ZARAKANI, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-0696-MCE-KJN

ORDER

On December 29, 2014, the court issued an order to show cause (“OSC”) directing 

defendant’s counsel of record, William Bernheim, to show cause in writing why the court should 

not impose sanctions against him personally “for his failure to respond to plaintiff’s discovery 

requests, failure to file a request for withdrawal of counsel or substitution of counsel with the 

court, and failure to appear on behalf of his clients at the December 18, 2014 hearing.”1 (ECF 

No. 20 at 2.) The OSC required Mr. Bernheim to provide his written response by no later than 

 

1 As noted in the OSC, during the December 18, 2014 hearing on plaintiff’s motion to compel, 

defendant Saeed Zarakani stated that he had received notice from Mr. Bernheim that Mr. 

Bernheim intends to no longer represent Mr. Zarakani and his co-defendant Mardan, Inc. in this 

matter. Similarly, counsel for plaintiff stated during the hearing that plaintiff had received similar 

notice that Mr. Bernheim intended to withdraw from his representation of defendants. 

Nevertheless, as of the present date, Mr. Bernheim has not made any filing or other formal 

indication to the court that he seeks to withdraw as defendants’ counsel or to substitute in a new 

attorney as defendants’ counsel of record in this case.

Case 2:14-cv-00696-MCE-KJN Document 22 Filed 01/14/15 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

January 7, 2015. However, as of the present date, the docket reflects that Mr. Bernheim has not 

made such a filing. Indeed, the docket reflects that there has been no activity in this case since 

the court’s issuance of the OSC on December 29, 2014. 

Because of Mr. Bernheim’s failures to comply with the court’s orders and Local Rules,

and apparent abandonment of his clients in this matter, the undersigned is left with no choice but 

to impose a monetary sanction personally on Mr. Bernheim. See E.D. Local Rule 110. 

Accordingly, the court finds it appropriate to sanction William Bernheim personally in the 

amount of $500.00 pursuant to the court’s inherent power. Id. While the court ordinarily would 

be inclined to issue less severe sanctions, Mr. Bernheim’s continued failure to respond to the 

OSC, file documents indicating his intent to withdraw as defendants’ counsel of record in 

conformance with the Local Rules, or respond in any way to plaintiff’s pending motion to 

compel, exacerbates the problems created for plaintiff, Mr. Bernheim’s clients, and the court by 

Mr. Bernheim’s repeated failures in this matter. Hopefully, such a sanction will secure Mr. 

Bernheim’s attention and future compliance with this court’s orders.

Furthermore, Mr. Bernheim shall also provide the court with a statement in writing 

informing the court of whether he intends to continue to represent defendants in this matter. If he 

intends to withdraw as counsel for defendants, Mr. Bernheim shall also file either a substitution of 

attorney form substituting in new counsel in compliance with the requirements of Local Rule 

182(g) or file a motion requesting leave of court to withdraw from representation in compliance 

with the requirements of Local Rule 182(d).

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, defendants’ counsel of record, William 

Bernheim, shall pay the Clerk of Court $500.00 in monetary sanctions based on his failure to 

comply with court orders. Mr. Bernheim shall not attempt to recover, directly or indirectly, the 

amount of such sanctions from his clients.

////

////

////

Case 2:14-cv-00696-MCE-KJN Document 22 Filed 01/14/15 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

2. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, defendants’ counsel of record, William 

Bernheim, shall provide the court with a statement in writing informing the court of whether he 

intends to continue to represent defendants in this matter. If Mr. Bernheim intends to withdraw as 

counsel for defendants, he shall also file a substitution of attorney form substituting in new 

counsel in compliance with the requirements of Local Rule 182(g) or file a motion requesting 

leave of court to withdraw from representation in compliance with the requirements of Local Rule 

182(d).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 14, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-00696-MCE-KJN Document 22 Filed 01/14/15 Page 3 of 3