ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE ATTORNEY [DOC. 112]

THOMAS J. WHELAN, District Judge.

Pending before the Court is a motion to substitute attorney for Plaintiff DK Holdings. (Mot. to Substitute [Doc. 112].) Plaintiff moves to substitute One LLP for Knobbe, Martens, Olson, & Bear LLP. The motion bears the signatures of the withdrawing attorneys and the substituting attorneys. (See id.) It lacks Plaintiff's signature, in violation of the Southern District's Local Rules. See Civ. L.R. 83.3(f)(2).

"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. Cal. Oct. 14, 2009) (citing Canandaigua Wine Co., Inc. v. Moldauer, 2009 WL 89141, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2009)).

Though the motion lacks Plaintiff's signature, it contains a representation from both sets of attorneys (signed by five attorneys, total) that DK Holdings has retained One LLP in place of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP. Attorneys are officers of the court, see Cal. Rule of Court 9.4, and it is reasonable to infer from the motion that Plaintiff consents to the substitution. Granting the motion would not prejudice other litigants, harm to the administration of justice, or delay resolution of this matter in any meaningful way.

The Court GRANTS the motion. One LLP is now counsel of record for DK Holdings in place of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP.

IT IS SO ORDERED.