Velasquez v. Mexico Sport Center & Bicycle Repair Corp

Opinion

VUYLUNIEINT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DATE FILED; __ 10/28/2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RICARDO VELASQUEZ, Plaintiff, against: 1: 24-cv-03273 (MKV) MEXICO SPORT CENTER & BICYCLE ORDER REPAIR CORP., 2320 HUGHES BH LLC, —_ NASSER ZAR INC., and MEXICO SPORT CENTER & BICYCLE REPAIR, Defendants.

MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, United States District Judge: Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on May 29, 2024. [ECF No. 7]. Defendant, without counsel, filed a response on October 18, 2024. [ECF No. 22]. “The law is absolutely clear that a corporation cannot appear pro se in federal court.” Krishiv, LLC v. Mt. Hawley Ins. Co., No. 23- CV-2727 (ER), 2023 WL 4931668, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 2, 2023) (quoting Mercu- Ray Indus., Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Co., 392 F. Supp. 16, 18 (S.D.N.Y.), aff’d sub nom. Mercu-Ray Indus., Inc. v. Bristol-Meyers Co., 508 F.2d 837 (2d Cir. 1974)). Nor can a corporation appear through a lay representative. Eagle Assocs. v. Bank of Montreal, 926 F.2d 1305, 1308 (2d Cir. 1991). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that because corporate Defendant cannot appear pro se, counsel must enter an appearance in this case on or before November 18, 2024. IT IS FUTHER ORDERED that because corporate Defendant cannot appear pro se, counsel must re-file an answer on or before December 9, 2024. SO ORDERED.

Date: October 28, 2024 vii mit vystocI New York, NY United States District Judge