Holmes

Holmes v. Estock

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 14, 20223:16-cv-02458California578 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 CHARLES HOLMES, Case No. 16-cv-2458-MMA (BLM)

Plaintiff,

NOTICE AND ORDER

v. DISCHARGING OSC AND SETTING

DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO

ESTOCK, et al.,

WITHDRAW OR SUBSTITUTE

Defendants. COUNSEL 15 On December 20, 2021, the Court ordered Plaintiff’s counsel, Mr. Brian Vogel, to show cause why the Court should not issue sanctions for his failure to prosecute the case and comply with various Court orders. Doc. No. 157 (the “OSC”). In the OSC, the Court detailed Mr. Vogel’s history of noncompliance, ultimately culminating in his failure to file pretrial disclosures. Id. On January 10, 2022, Mr. Vogel filed a declaration responding to the OSC. Doc. No. 158. According to Mr. Vogel, he contracted COVID-19 and was unable to meet the deadlines. Id. at 2. Mr. Vogel explains that he intends to “file a second motion to be relieved as counsel as soon as [he] can find suitable counsel for Mr.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.