Sanchez Incorporated v. City of Claremont, California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANCHEZ INCORPORATED, Case No. 21-cv-0045-BAS-BGS Plaintiff,

ORDER v. (1) DIRECTING PLAINTIFF CORPORATION TO OBTAIN

CITY OF CLAIREMONT,

COUNSEL; and

Defendant. (2) DENYING MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS (ECF

No. 2)

On January 11, 2021, Plaintiff Sanchez Incorporated filed the present action without appointing counsel and moved for a leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) Parties generally may plead and conduct their own cases personally. 28 U.S.C. § 1654. However, “[o]nly natural persons representing their individual interests in propria persona may appear in court without representation by an attorney.” Civ. L.R. 83.3(j). “All other parties, including corporations, partnerships and other legal entities, may appear in court only through an attorney permitted to practice pursuant to Civil Local Rule 83.3.” Civ. L.R. 83.3(j); see also Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201–02 (1993) (“It has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel... . [T]hat rule applies equally to all artificial lentities.”); United States v. High Country Broadcasting Co., Inc., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th 1993) (affirming district court’s entry of default judgment against the corporation when the corporation failed to retain counsel for the duration of the litigation and attempted to proceed through its unlicensed president and sole shareholder); Greenspan v. Admin. Office of the United States Courts, No. 14cv2396 JTM, 2014 WL 6847460, at *6 (N.D. Dec. 4, 2014) (dismissing corporate plaintiffs for failure to obtain legal representation).

Here, Sanchez Incorporated is not a natural person and must appear in court only /through an attorney who is allowed to practice in this district. The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to obtain counsel on or before February 5, 2021. If Plaintiff does not obtain counsel by that date, the Court will dismiss this action with prejudice. See Greenspan, No. }2014 WL 6847460, at *6.

Because Plaintiff corporation lacks counsel, the Court will not consider its motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2.) The motion is thus DENIED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED. )

DATED: January 12, 2021 ( yi A A (Hiphan 6 United States District Judge

_9.