Campos-Eibeck v. C R Bard Incorporated

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CATALINA CAMPOS-EIBECK, Case No.: 19-CV-2026 W (BLM) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE v. APPLICATION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL [DOC. 22] C R BARD INC., et al., 14 Defendants.

16 Pending before the Court is an ex parte application1 by John Dalimonte, Paul L. Stoller, and Ashley Crowell to withdraw as attorneys of record for Plaintiff Catalina Campos- Eibeck. [Doc. 22.] Despite service of the motion on all parties on January 14, 2020, no opposition has been filed.

20 “The grant or denial of an attorney’s motion to withdraw in a civil case is a matter addressed to the discretion of the trial court . . . .” Washington v. Sherwin Real Estate, Inc., 694 F.2d 1081, 1087 (7th Cir. 1982). Factors considered in evaluating the application include: “1) the reasons why withdrawal is sought; 2) the prejudice withdrawal may cause to other litigants; 3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the administration of justice; and 4) the degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution || of the case.” CE Resource, Inc. v Magellan Group, LLC, 2009 WL 3367489, at *2 (E.D.

2 ||Cal. Oct. 14, 2009) (citing Canandaigua Wine Co., Inc. v. Moldauer, 2009 WL 89141, at 3 (ED. Cal. Jan. 14, 2009)).

4 Given the procedural posture of this case, Dalimonte, Stoller, and Crowell’s || withdrawal will not prejudice the litigants in this matter, harm the administration of justice, or delay resolution of the case. Plaintiff will continue to be represented through ||Mr. Gregory D. Rueb of Dalimonte Rueb Stoller, LLP.

8 For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the application to withdraw as counsel of record in this action for Plaintiff Campos-Eibeck. [Doc. 22.]

11 IT IS SO ORDERED.

13 Dated: January 17, 2020 \ 4 [pe Lon 15 Hn. 1 omas J. Whelan 16 United States District Judge