Jane Doe Nos. 60 through 121 v. Aylo Media S.A.R.L. et al

1
23-cv-1821-WQH-KSC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JANE DOE NOS. 60 through 121
inclusive, individuals,
Plaintiffs,
v.
AYLO MEDIA S.A.R.L., (f/k/a
“MindGeek S.a.r.l.”) a foreign
entity; AYLO FREESITES, LTD.,
(f/k/a “MG Freesites, Ltd.” and
d/b/a “PornHub,” “YouPorn,”
“RedTube,” and “Tube8”) a foreign
entity; AYLO BILLING US
CORP., (f/k/a “MG Billing US
Corp.” and d/b/a “ProBiller”) a
Delaware corporation; 9219-1568
QUEBEC, INC., a foreign entity;
and AYLO HOLDINGS S.A.R.L.,
Defendants.
Case No.: 23-cv-1821-WQH-KSC
ORDER
HAYES, Judge:
The matter before the Court is the Motion to Withdraw as Attorney (ECF No. 46)
filed by Defendants Aylo Holdings S.a.r.l., Aylo Freesites, Ltd., Aylo Billing US Corp.,
and 9219-1568 Quebec, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”).
Case 3:23-cv-01821-WQH-GC Document 49 Filed 02/27/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
23-cv-1821-WQH-KSC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
“An attorney may not withdraw as counsel except by leave of court, and the decision
to grant or deny counsel’s motion to withdraw is committed to the discretion of the trial
court.” Urias v. Labcorp Peri-Approval & Commercialization Inc., No. 23-CV-1815 JLS
(MSB), 2023 WL 8845384, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2023) (citation omitted); see also
United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir. 2009); S.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 83.3(f)(3)
(requiring that a notice of motion to withdraw as attorney of record be served on the adverse
party and on the moving attorney’s client, along with a declaration of service).
In ruling on a motion to withdraw as counsel, courts consider: (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.
Leatt Corp. v. Innovative Safety Tech., LLC, No. 09-CV-1301-IEG POR, 2010 WL 444708,
at *1 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2010) (citation omitted).
Here, Defendants move for an Order permitting Mitchel Silberberg & Knupp LLP,
and specifically its attorneys David A. Steinberg, Marc. E. Mayer, and Emily F. Evitt, to
withdraw as counsel in this action. (ECF No. 46 at 2.) Defendants state that they will
continue to be represented by Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. Id. In
support, Defendants submit a Declaration of Emily F. Evitt stating that copies of the motion
have been served on counsel for Plaintiff. (ECF No. 46-1.)
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Withdraw as Attorney (ECF No. 46)
is granted. Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP, and its counsel David A. Steinberg, Marc
E. Mayer, and Emily F. Evitt, are withdrawn as attorneys of record for Defendants in this
action.
Dated: February 27, 2026
Case 3:23-cv-01821-WQH-GC Document 49 Filed 02/27/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2