GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedMay 2, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-00395
StatusUnknown

This text of GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc (GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE

9 10 GS HOLISTIC, LLC, CASE NO. C23-0395JLR 11 Plaintiff, MINUTE ORDER v. 12 MARTIAL INC., et al., 13 Defendants. 14

15 The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable 16 James L. Robart: 17 Before the court is an answer to Plaintiff GS Holistic, LLC’s complaint filed by 18 pro se Defendant Nasim Choudry. (Ans. (Dkt. # 9); see Compl. (Dkt. # 1).) Mr. 19 Choudry represents that he filed the answer on behalf of himself and Defendants Martial 20 Inc. and Imtiaz Ahmed Mir. (See id. at 2.) 21 “While a non-attorney may appear pro se on his own behalf, ‘[h]e has no authority 22 to appear as an attorney for others than himself.’” Johns v. Cty. of San Diego, 114 F.3d 1 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting C.E. Pope Equity Tr. v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 2 697 (9th Cir. 1987)). In addition, a corporation or other artificial entity must be

3 represented by licensed counsel. See Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 4 201-202 (1993) (“It has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a 5 corporation may appear in federal courts only through licensed counsel . . . . [T]hat rule 6 applies equally to all artificial entities.”); see also Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7 83.2(b)(4) (“A business entity, except a sole proprietorship, must be represented by 8 counsel.”). A business entity that fails to appear in federal court proceedings through

9 counsel may have default and default judgment entered against it. See United States v. 10 High Country Broad. Co., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993). 11 Because Mr. Choudry does not appear to be a licensed attorney, he cannot 12 represent Martial Inc. and Mr. Mir in this court. Accordingly, the court STRIKES those 13 portions of the answer (Dkt. # 9) that purport to answer the complaint on behalf of

14 Martial Inc. and Mr. Mir. If they wish to defend themselves in this litigation, (1) Martial 15 Inc. must obtain licensed counsel to represent it and (2) Mr. Mir may either file an answer 16 pro se on his own behalf or obtain licensed counsel. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 17 83.1 (setting forth the requirements for admission to practice in this court). 18 Filed and entered this 2nd day of May, 2023.

19 RAVI SUBRAMANIAN Clerk of Court 20 s/ Ashleigh Drecktrah 21 Deputy Clerk

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
GS Holistic LLC v. Martial Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gs-holistic-llc-v-martial-inc-wawd-2023.