Free Memorandum in Opposition - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-04973-JW

Document 19

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

WILLIAM R. TAMAYO, SBN 084965 DAVID F. OFFEN-BROWN, SBN 063321 LINDA S. ORDONIO-DIXON, SBN 172830 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION San Francisco District Office 350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105-1260 Telephone No. (415) 625-5654 Fax No. (415) 625-5657 Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. BAHAMA BILLY'S INC., Defendant.

Case No. C 07-4973 JW PVT PLAINTIFF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION'S OPPOSTION TO MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR BAHAMA BILLY'S INC. Date: June 9, 2008 Time: 9:00 a.m. Judge: Hon. Judge Ware Ctrm: #8, 4th Floor

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) files the instant Opposition to Defense Counsel Carlton DiSante & Freudenberger LLP's Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for Bahama Billy's, Inc. While the EEOC does not oppose Carlton DiSante & Freudenberger LLP's (CDF) ultimate withdrawal from this case, the EEOC respectfully requests that the Court delay withdrawal until substitute counsel is retained by Defendant. Until recently, the parties have been attempting to move forward towards the resolution of the

26 27 28 claims in this case. These negotiations have included several conversations in March and April with the Court appointed mediator, Barbara Bryant. On April 18, 2008, the Court approved the parties'
Opp. To Withdrawal of Atty 07-4973 JW PVT

Case 5:07-cv-04973-JW

Document 19

Filed 05/19/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6

negotiated Protective Order to allow the exchange of information to facilitate such communications. (See, Docket No. 14.) On April 21, 2008, the Court approved the parties' request to extend the mediation deadline in this case to June 23, 2008 to further facilitate informal resolution of the case. (See, Docket No. 17.) However, just two weeks later, CDF filed the instant motion. The moving brief provides no indication of when substitute counsel might be retained, or whether Defendant is even actively seeking other counsel. Indeed, the brief hints that Defendant may "choose" not to seek new

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Based on the foregoing, the EEOC respectfully requests that CDF be required to continue to 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Opp. To Withdrawal of Atty 07-4973 JW PVT

counsel. [Moving brief, page 5 line 7.] Local Rule 3-9 provides that "[a] corporation...may appear only through a member of the bar of this Court." The Defendant in this action is a corporation and thus must be represented by counsel. Withdrawal of CDF without substitute counsel will effectively halt the speedy resolution of this case. CDF has represented Defendant since October of 2006 and their withdrawal prior to the completion of the Court ordered mediation would cause prejudice to all parties.

represent Defendant until substitute counsel is retained and that Defendant be required to retain such counsel within a reasonable period after the entry of the Court's order on this instant motion. Respectfully submitted,

Dated: May 19, 2008 By: //s// LINDA S. ORDONIO-DIXON