Newman v. Maceno Pizza LLC

Filing 10

ORDER STRIKING re 8 Answer/Statement of Juraci Maceno Filho. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 3/4/2025. (klh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/5/2025) copy sent to Maceno Pizza LLC at 1934 Ocean Ave., SF, CA 94127 on 3/5/2025.

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

JOHN NEWMAN,
Plaintiff,

8

United States District Court
Northern District of California

9

v.

Case No. 4:25-cv-01105-KAW
ORDER STRIKING STATEMENT OF
JURACI MACENO FILHO
Re: Dkt. No. 8

10

MACENO PIZZA LLC,

11

Defendant.

12
13
14
15
16
17

On February 3, 2025, Plaintiff John Newman filed this lawsuit against Maceno Pizza LLC
(dba Monza Pizzeria). (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.)
On February 18, 2025, Juraci Maceno Filho, owner of Defendant Maceno Pizza LLC, filed
a statement in which he denied the allegations in the complaint. (Dkt. No. 8.)
Defendant, however, is an LLC, and corporations may only appear in court through an

18

attorney. See Rowland v. Cal. Men's Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993). Mr. Filho is not

19

licensed to practice in California nor is he admitted to practice in this district. Thus, to the extent

20

that Mr. Filho’s statement could be construed as an answer to the complaint, the Court strikes his

21

statement under its inherent powers. See United States v. High Country Broad. Co., 3 F.3d 1244,

22

1245 (9th Cir. 1993) (“perfectly appropriate” for district court to strike answer and enter default

23

judgment against corporation when it failed to retain counsel); TeleVideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal,

24

826 F.2d 915, 916 (9th Cir. 1987) (determining that striking an answer and entering default

25

judgment are within a court’s inherent powers); see also Coastal Env't Rts. Found. v. Aztec Perlite

26

Co., Inc., No. 24-cv-385-RSH-SBC, 2024 WL 4520350, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 16, 2024) (struck

27

answer and entered default sua sponte under court’s inherent powers).

28

Mr. Filho is advised that he must obtain counsel for the corporate defendant to defend this

1

action, and that the failure to timely respond to the complaint by March 18, 2025 may ultimately

2

result in default judgment being entered against Defendant Maceno Pizza LLC. (See Summons

3

Returned Executed, Dkt. No. 9.)

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 4, 2025
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2