Roshan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PEYMAN ROSHAN, Case No. 20-cv-04770-AGT

Plaintiff,

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RELIEF

v. FROM JUDGMENT

GEORGE S. CARDONA, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 81 Defendants.

Peyman Roshan filed this action to enjoin State Bar disciplinary proceedings and to obtain an order declaring State Bar disciplinary rules and procedures unconstitutional. The Court held that Younger abstention applied and dismissed the case. Dkt. 34. The Ninth Cir- cuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court denied Roshan’s petition for certiorari. Dkts. 58, 74. Roshan now moves for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6), based on an al- leged intervening change in the law. The decisions he relies upon, Williams v. Reed, 145 S. Ct. 465 (2025), and Seattle Pacific University. v. Ferguson, 104 F.4th 50 (9th Cir. 2024), didn’t change the law applicable to his claims. Williams addressed state administrative exhaustion requirements, not abstention. See 145 S. Ct. at 470. The decision isn’t controlling here. The Ninth Circuit recently reached the same conclusion in another case filed by Roshan, in which he sought to enjoin the…