Opinion
02 Civ. 0420 (RCC)(FM)
October 4, 2002
Anthony Motta, Esq., New York, NY, for Defendant IVALIDATE.
Anthony Martini, Stamford, CT, for Plaintiff DIGIGAN, Inc.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On September 18, 2002, I granted the motions of counsel for both plaintiff DIGIGAN and defendant IVALIDATE to withdraw from any further representation of their clients. The parties were instructed to retain new counsel, who were to enter a notice of appearance before September 30, 2002. Defendant IVALIDATE timely complied, but no notice of appearance has been filed by DIGIGAN.
As noted in my September 18 order, a corporation may not proceed without counsel in federal court. See PIC Power Industries, Ltd. v. Cook-N-Throw, Inc., 2001 WL 840073 (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2001); Arch Assoc., Inc. v. HuAmerica Int'l, 1994 WL 319257 (S.D.N.Y. June 29, 1994). Therefore, having failed to procure new counsel by the required deadline, DIGIGAN is unable to prosecute this suit. For that reason, I recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
Notice of Procedure For Filing of Objections to this Report and Recommendation The parties are hereby directed that if they have any objections to this Report and Recommendation, they must, within ten (10) days from today, make them in writing, file them with the Clerk of the Court, and send copies to the chambers of the Honorable Richard C. Casey United States District Judge, at the United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, N.Y. 10007, to the chambers of the undersigned, at the United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, N.Y. 10007, and to any opposing parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), 6(e), 72(b). Any requests for an extension of time for filing objections must be directed to Judge Casey. Any failure to file timely objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 6(a), 6(e), 72(b).
SO ORDERED.