1

2

3

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6

7 SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, Case No. 2:22-cv-00373-APG-NJK 8 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 9 v.

10 NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, 11 Defendant(s). 12 Pending before the Court are two orders to show cause why attorneys Wright and Lancaster 13 should not be sanctioned. Docket Nos. 20, 27. The first order to show cause arises out of the 14 failure to file a discovery plan. Docket No. 20. Attorneys Wright and Lancaster did not respond. 15 The second order to show cause arises out of the failure to respond to the first order to show cause. 16 Docket No. 27. A response to the second order to show cause has been filed. Docket No. 30. 17 With respect to attorney Lancaster, it is now represented that he is no longer an attorney 18 on this matter and, indeed, no longer practices law in Nevada. Docket No. 30 at 1. If that is in 19 fact the case, then Defendant’s current counsel needs to file a motion to remove attorney Lancaster 20 as attorney of record in this case. Such a motion must be filed by December 14, 2022.1 The orders 21 to show cause are otherwise DISCHARGED with respect to attorney Lancaster. 22 With respect to attorney Wright and the first order to show cause, he indicates that the 23 failure to timely file a discovery plan stemmed from that fact that he is unfamiliar with practice in 24 federal court and was overwhelmed with his workload, which increased after attorney Lancaster’s 25 departure. Docket No. 30 at 3-4. Such reasoning is not compelling, but the Court will resolve the 26

27 1 It would appear further that Mr. Lancaster needs to update his CMECF account. Local Rule IC 2-1(g). As the current contact information is out of date, however, the Court is not able 28 to provide this order to Mr. Lancaster to obtain that result. 1} first order to show cause with a CAUTION that attorney Wright is required to familiarize himself with all governing rules and to take all necessary steps to properly manage his workload. 3 With respect to attorney Wright and the second order to show cause, he indicates that he 4] violated that order because he has been inattentive to the orders issued in this case, including after 5] seeing that Plaintiffs counsel responded to the order to show cause. Docket No. 30 at 2,4. Asa 6] threshold matter, it appears the staffing shortage discussed above has been resolved—or at least 7|| eased—for at least six months. See id. at 4 (noting additional counsel hired in May 2022). Hence, 8|| that does not appear to be a pertinent excuse at this juncture. Moreover, attorney Wright’s 9] reasoning is essentially that he does not closely monitor the electronic notices that orders have been entered in his cases, which is unacceptable. Attorneys must comply with orders and they 11] obviously cannot do so if they do not read them. The Court hereby orders attorney Wright to 12] attend four hours of continuing legal education regarding federal practice and procedure within the next six months. Cf Christiana Trust v. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC,

, at *4 (D. 14] Nev. Oct. 7, 2019). The continuing legal education must meet the following criteria: (1) it must 15|| be approved by state CLE authorities, (2) it must be in a live setting (7.e., not pre-recorded), and 16] (3) it must not be counted toward, and will be in excess of, attorney Wright’s CLE requirements 17|| for the Nevada Bar or any other state bar to which he belongs. Cf Petrish v. JP Morgan

]

(S.D.N.Y. 2011). No later than June 15, 2023, attorney Wright must file 19] a separate declaration attesting to the completion of the required courses and attaching copies of 20] the certificate of attendance for each course. The second order to show cause is otherwise 21 DISCHARGED. 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: December 8, 2022 Nancy J. Koppe, 25 United States Magistrate Judge 26 27 28