Opinion
ORDER
DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.
This matter came before the court on January 11, 2013, for hearing of plaintiff's motion to strike. (Doc. No. 22.) Randy Moore, Esq. appeared telephonically on behalf of the plaintiff. No appearance was made by or on behalf of defendant Leone Wiebe nor was an appearance was made on behalf of the Hollywood Cafe Lodi.
Upon consideration of the arguments on file and made at the hearing, and for the reasons set forth in detail on the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's December 6, 2012 motion to strike (Doc. No. 22) is granted;
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to strike the document filed May 10, 2012 (Doc. No. 9) which was erroneously characterized as an answer upon filing; and
Although the purported answer was deficient in several respects, defendants are advised that as a corporation, defendant Hollywood Cafe Lodi cannot appear pro se and must be represented by a licensed attorney. See Rowland v. California Men's Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993) ("[i]t has been the law for the better part of two centuries... that a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel.").
3. Within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of this order defendants shall both file responsive pleadings that comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice.
In the event the defendants fail to file responsive pleadings plaintiff may request that the Clerk of the Court enter defendants' default and, thereafter, move for entry of default judgment. Counsel for plaintiff is advised that in the event plaintiff moves for entry of default judgment, the undersigned requires that such a motion be noticed for hearing served on the defendants despite their default.