Securities and Exchange Commission v. Markman Biologics Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * Securities and Exchange Commission, Case No. 2:23-cv-00288-APG-DJA Plaintiff, 7 Order v. Markman Biologics Corp. and Alan Shinderman, 10 Defendants, 11 and Aspen Asset Management Services, LLC 13 Relief Defendant.

15 The law firms of Lucosky Brookman LLP and Marquis Aurbach move to withdraw as counsel of record for Defendant Markman Biologics Corp. but will remain as counsel for Defendant Alan Shinderman and Aspen Management Services, LLC. (ECF No. 26). The Court finds that counsel has met the requirements of Local Rule IA 11-6(b). Additionally, no party has opposed the motion, constituting their consent to the Court granting it under Local Rule 7-2(d).

20 Because it is a corporation, Markman Biologics Corp. must retain counsel to proceed in this action. See Reading Intern., Inc. v. Malulani Group, Ltd., 814 F.3d 1046, 1053 (9th Cir. 2016) (explaining that corporations must be represented by counsel).

24 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion to withdraw (ECF No. 26) is granted.

25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Markman Biologics Corp. must file a status report regarding its retention of counsel on or before October 30, 2023.

1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to place Markman Biologics Corp.’s last known addresses on the docket:

4 Markman Biologics Corp. Attn: Spencer Flores 5 13155 Noel Road Suite 900 6 Dallas, TX 75240 Email: [email protected] 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to mail this order to Markman Biologics Corp. at the address listed above.

12 DATED: September 29, 2023 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE