Mejia v. USDA (United States Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service Administrative Review Office)

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: November 9, 2021
• Docket: 1:21-cv-09054
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT USDC SDNY SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED ROMAN A. MEJIA, DOC #: DATE FILED: 11/9/2021 Plaintiff, “against: 21 Civ. 9054 (AT) USDA (UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ORDER AGRICULTURE FOOD AND NUTRITION —=—_ SERVICE) ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OFFICE, Defendants. ANALISA TORRES, United States District Judge: Plaintiff pro se, Roman A. Mejia, brings this case on behalf of 186 Grocery Corp., of which he is the owner. Compl. at 5, 8, ECF No. 1. A pro se individual may not appear on behalf of a corporation. See Sewell y. 1199 Nat. Ben. Fund for Health and Human Servs., 303 F. App’x 902, 903 n.1 (2d Cir. 2008). Furthermore, only the “store,” 186 Grocery Corp., may seek judicial review of its disqualification under 7 U.S.C. § 2023(a)(13). See Guzman v. U.S. Dept of Agric. Food & Nutrition Serv., 931 F. Supp. 2d 488, 490 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). Therefore, Mejia cannot litigate this case as the plaintiff. Accordingly, by December 8, 2021, if 186 Grocery Corp. wishes to seek review of its disqualification, Meija must substitute 186 Grocery Corp. as party plaintiff. Further, 186 Grocery Corp. must appear through an attorney, because a corporation is not permitted to appear in court unless it does so through a lawyer. See Pecarsky v. Galaxiworld.com Ltd., 249 F.3d 167, 172 (2d Cir. 2001). If 186 Grocery Corp. does not appear in this matter by December 8, 2021, the case will be dismissed for lack of standing. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 9, 2021 New York, New York

ANALISA TORRES United States District Judge