Opinion
24-cv-00220-BLF
04-23-2024
SYNOPSYS, INC., Plaintiff, v. SUNLUNE CORPORATION, Defendant.
ORDER VACATING HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT'S ANSWER; GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE ANSWER; AND SETTING DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO MAKE PROPER APPEARANCE THROUGH COUNSEL
[Re: ECF 31]
BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge
Having reviewed Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant Sunlune Corporation's Answer (ECF 31), which is unopposed, as well as Plaintiff's Reply (ECF 33), the Court orders as follows:
(1) The motion is suitable for decision without oral argument, and the hearing previously set for August 8, 2024 is VACATED. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b).
(2) The motion is GRANTED and Defendant's answer (ECF 29) is STRICKEN. The answer was filed by Defendant acting pro se. However, a corporate defendant cannot proceed before the Court pro se - a corporation may proceed only through a licensed attorney. See In re Bigelow, 179 F.3d 1164, 1165 (9th Cir. 1999) (“The law is clear that a corporation can be represented only by a licensed attorney.”).
(3) Defendant is granted 30 days, until May 23, 2024, to make an appearance through counsel. If counsel does not make an appearance for Defendant by May 23, 2024, Plaintiff may file a motion for clerk's entry of default and, subsequently, a motion for default judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.