DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CV424490·santaclara·Civil·Civil
Hearing 19 days agoGRANTED

Fr. Neelima Kethineni, M.D v. Techrobit Inc. and Diane Chipana

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY

Hearing date
Aug 5, 2026
Department
12
Prevailing
Moving Party
Next hearing
Nov 25, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffFr. Neelima Kethineni, M.D
DefendantTechrobit Inc.
DefendantDiane Chipana

Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 12 Honorable Nahal Iravani-Sani, Presiding Courtroom Clerk, Ryan Nguyen 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: (408) 882-2230

DATE: 08/05/2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. and 9:01 A.M.

LINE 10 & 25CV477676 Linda Johnson et al COMPROMISE ON MINOR’S CLAIM & MOTION TO SEAL v. 11 Hanford Hotels, Inc. Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 10

Plaintiff to prepare the final proposed order, accompanied by the necessary Form EFS-020, within 7 days of the hearing. 23CV424490 Fr. Neelima Kethineni, MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY 9:01 M.D v. Techrobit Inc. and Defendant’s counsel moves to be Relieved as Counsel for LINE 1 Diane Chipana. Defendant pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 284(2).

Good Cause appearing, the motion is GRANTED. Movant shall give notice to Techrobit Inc. within 2 court days of the hearing, including the following:

Because a corporation may appear only through licensed counsel, the corporate party shall obtain substitute counsel, who shall file a substitution of attorney no later than 30 days from service of this order.

Techrobit must appear at the Case Management Conference set for November 25, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 12. The corporate defendant is advised that it may not appear in propria persona through an officer, director, or shareholder. Failure to timely obtain substitute counsel may result in the striking of its pleadings, entry of default, dismissal of its claims, or such other sanctions as are authorized by law.

Movant to prepare the final proposed order, accompanied by the necessary Form EFS-020 within 7 days of the hearing.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share