Opinion
04 Civ. 3531 (LTS) (HBP).
February 13, 2007
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The motion of Meredith Cohen Greenfogel Skirnick, P.C. and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP to withdraw as counsel for plaintiff is granted without opposition.
It is beyond question that a corporation, such as plaintiff, can appear in an action only through a licensed member of the bar and cannot proceed pro se. Rowland v. California Men's Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993); Powerserve Int'l, Inc. v. Lavi, 239 F.3d 508, 514 (2d Cir. 2001); Jacobs v. Patent Enforcement Fund, Inc., 230 F.3d 565, 568 (2d Cir. 2000); Eagle Assoc. v. Bank of Montreal, 926 F.2d 1305, 1306-08 (2d Cir. 1991); S.E.C. v. Research Automation Corp., 521 F.2d 585, 589 (2d Cir. 1975); RLS Assoc., LLC v. United Bank of Kuwait PLC, 01 Civ. 1290 (CSH), 2002 WL 122927 at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2002); Derekoylu Tekstil, Ltd. v. Oxford Indus., Inc., 99 Civ. 9685 (KMW) (JCF), 2001 WL 484017 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 19, 2001) (Report Recommendation); Comedy III Prods., Inc. v. Class Publ'ns, Inc., 95 Civ. 5552 (SS), 1996 WL 219636 at *1 n. 1 (S.D.N.Y. May 1, 1996). Thus, plaintiff must retain new counsel if it wishes to proceed with this action.
I also note that the prohibition against a corporation's appearing pro se can not be evaded through the assignment of the corporation's claim to an individual. Pridgen v. Andresen, 113 F.3d 391, 393 (2d Cir. 1997); Jones v. Niagara Frontier Transp. Auth., 722 F.2d 20, 23 (2d Cir. 1983); Lutin v. New Jersey Steel Corp., 93 Civ. 6612 (AGS), 1996 WL 636037 at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 1, 1996); Lupowitz, Inc. v. Eclipse Holdings, Inc., 94 Civ. 2916 (DC), 1996 WL 285363 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 30, 1996), aff'd mem., 108 F.3d 1370 (2d Cir. 1997); Ultracashmere House, Ltd. v. Nordstrom, Inc., 123 F.R.D. 435, 436 (S.D.N.Y. 1988).
Accordingly, all proceedings in this matter are stayed for thirty (30) days to permit plaintiff to secure new counsel. If plaintiff fails to secure new counsel within that period of time, or fails to show good cause why the time period should be extended, I shall issue a report and recommendation recommending the a default judgment be entered dismissing plaintiff's complaint. See Derekoylu Tekstil, Ltd. v. Oxford Indus., Inc.,supra, 2001 WL 484017 at *1.
Outgoing counsel are directed to provide a copy of this Order to Advanced Analytics, Inc. and to explain the foregoing paragraph to it .
Because they disclose attorney-client communications unrelated to the merits of the action, the Clerk of the Court is directed to file the motion and all papers submitted in support of the motion under seal.
SO ORDERED.