United States v. Tacker

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT SEATTLE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, C19-1285 TSZ v. WILLIAM A. TACKER, JR., et al., Defendants. The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge: (1) Counsel for defendant Accounts Receivable, Inc., Brian K. Gerst of Gerst Law, PLLC, has filed a Notice of Intent to Withdraw, docket no. 41. Counsel is advised that such notice is not effective, and that counsel must seek leave to withdraw via either (i) motion or (ii) stipulation and proposed order signed by all counsel. See Local Civil Rule 83.2(b)(1). Because defendant is a corporate entity, it may not represent itself and may appear only through an attorney. E.g., United States v. High Country Broadcasting Co., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993). Along with any motion for leave to withdraw, counsel must present a certification that such motion was served on defendant and defendant was advised that failure to retain a substitute attorney might result in entry of default against it. See Local Civil Rule 83.2(b)(4). (2) The Clerk is directed to correct the docket to reflect that Mr. Gerst remains counsel of record for Accounts Receivable, Inc., and to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of record. Dated this 26th day of February, 2020. William M. McCool Clerk s/Karen Dews