Gilbert v. Doctor's Choice Modesto LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARREN GILBERT, Case No. 1:21-cv-00690-AWI-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING SUBSTITUTION OF

ATTORNEY WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND

v. SUBJECT TO FILING OF A NOTICED

MOTION

DOCTOR’S CHOICE MODESTO LLC, et al., (ECF No. 40) 15 Defendants. 16 On March 24, 2022, Defendant Amar Kumar’s counsel, Lawrence T. Niermeyer, filed a substitution of attorney form indicating that Amar Kumar has been substituted as new counsel, for Amar Kumar. (ECF No. 40.) However, as indicated on the form by entering “none” in the space for “State Bar No.,” Amar Kumar is not a licensed attorney in the State of California. It is unclear why Defendant’s counsel presumed it to be proper to withdraw from the action in this manner using such form. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(d), an attorney may not withdraw as counsel and leave a party pro se without leave of Court upon noticed motion. L.R. 182(d). More specifically, Local Rule 182(d) provides:

Unless otherwise provided…