Opinion
3:21-CV-487-RJC-DCK
07-17-2023
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. STORM BRYANT, GENERATIONBLACK LLC, ELIJAH BRYANT III, NCOME LLC, and CAPITALSTORM LLC, Defendants.
ORDER
David C. Keesler United States Magistrate Judge
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on Defendants' counsel's “Motion To Reconsider And/Or Renewed Motion To Withdraw” (Document No. 71) filed May 31, 2023, and “Motion To Expedite” (Document No. 75) filed July 17, 2023. These motions have been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion and the record, the undersigned will grant the motions.
Noting that Defendants' counsel's “Motion To Reconsider And/Or Renewed Motion To Withdraw” satisfies the requirements of LCvR 83.1(f), and that Plaintiff has failed to file any response to the motion, the undersigned will allow the requested relief without further delay.
The undersigned again notes, however, that three (3) of Mr. Bondurant's clients are corporations, who are required to be represented by counsel. See Rowland v. Cal. Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993) (“It has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel.”); see also MR Crescent City, LLC v. TJ Biscayne Holdings LLC, 2013 WL 1243541, at **1 (4th Cir. March 28, 2013) (citing United States v. Hagerman, 545 F.3d 579, 581-82 (7th Cir. 2008) (LLCs, like corporations, are not permitted to proceed pro se) and Farazad v. Arris, 3:16-CV-077-FDW-DCK, 2016 WL 5719687 at *1 (W.D. N.C. Sept. 29, 2016). See (Document No. 69).
Defendants are respectfully advised that failure to abide by the Orders of this Court, the Local Rules, and/or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure may result in sanctions, which may include Judgment(s) against them.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendants' counsel's “Motion To Reconsider And/Or Renewed Motion To Withdraw” (Document No. 71) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the “Motion To Expedite” (Document No. 75) is GRANTED.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to send copies of this Order to Defendants at the mailing address in Raleigh, North Carolina and email addresses provided in Document No. 71. See (Document No. 71, pp. 5 and 7).
SO ORDERED.