GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington·Decided May 2, 2023·No. 2:23-cv-00395·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

GS HOLISTIC, LLC, CASE NO. C23-0395JLR Plaintiff, MINUTE ORDER v. MARTIAL INC., et al., Defendants.

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable James L. Robart: Before the court is an answer to Plaintiff GS Holistic, LLC’s complaint filed by pro se Defendant Nasim Choudry. (Ans. (Dkt. # 9); see Compl. (Dkt. # 1).) Mr. Choudry represents that he filed the answer on behalf of himself and Defendants Martial Inc. and Imtiaz Ahmed Mir. (See id. at 2.) “While a non-attorney may appear pro se on his own behalf, ‘[h]e has no authority to appear as an attorney for others than himself.’” Johns v. Cty. of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting C.E. Pope Equity Tr. v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987)). In addition, a corporation or other artificial entity must be

represented by licensed counsel. See Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-202 (1993) (“It has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may appear in federal courts only through licensed counsel . . . . [T]hat rule applies equally to all artificial entities.”); see also Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 83.2(b)(4) (“A business entity, except a sole proprietorship, must be represented by counsel.”). A business entity that fails to appear in federal court proceedings through

counsel may have default and default judgment entered against it. See United States v. High Country Broad. Co., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993). Because Mr. Choudry does not appear to be a licensed attorney, he cannot represent Martial Inc. and Mr. Mir in this court. Accordingly, the court STRIKES those portions of the answer (Dkt. # 9) that purport to answer the complaint on behalf of

Martial Inc. and Mr. Mir. If they wish to defend themselves in this litigation, (1) Martial Inc. must obtain licensed counsel to represent it and (2) Mr. Mir may either file an answer pro se on his own behalf or obtain licensed counsel. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 83.1 (setting forth the requirements for admission to practice in this court). Filed and entered this 2nd day of May, 2023.

Clerk of Court s/ Ashleigh Drecktrah Deputy Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc, (W.D. Wash. 2023).

GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc (GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related