Canatella

ORDER

The Opinion filed on June 12, 2002, and appearing at slip op. 8487 [ 293 F.3d 1099 ] is amended as follows:

At slip op. page 8499 [293 F.3d at 1105-06], delete the first full paragraph (beginning “In reciting the factual background concerning the California State Bar disciplinary system ....”) through the end of section B at slip op. page 8501 [293 F.3d at 1107] (last sentence reads “Because this was the only action that had taken place at the time Canatella filed his federal complaint .... ”), and substitute the following in its place:

Replace all occurrences of the term “magistrate” with “magistrate judge.”

9/ The district court relied on Jacobs v. State Bar of California, 20 Cal.3d 191 , 141 Cal.Rptr. 812 , 570 P.2d 1230 (1977), to *847 conclude that Canatella’s self-reporting of the sanctions order initiated a disciplinary proceeding. Jacobs was decided before the enactment of applicable California Court Rules governing disciplinary proceedings and is thus not applicable to this case.

10/ Given the absence of an ongoing proceeding, an “actual interference” inquiry under Green is no longer necessary.

With these amendments, the panel unanimously voted to deny the…