Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc. et al v. Miramar Quick Service Restaurant Corporation et al

Filing 75

ORDER DENYING Order to Show Cause, GRANTING Counsel's Motion to Withdraw. (Response due by 6/9/2020) Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

Case 2:18-cv-10767-TGB-EAS ECF No. 75 filed 05/26/20

PageID.1248

Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:18-cv-10767

LITTLE CAESAR
ENTERPRISES, INC., et al.,

HON. TERRENCE G. BERG

Plaintiffs,
v.
MIRAMAR QUICK SERVICE
RESTAURANT CORPORATION
et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE AS MOOT,
GRANTING COUNSEL’S
MOTION TO WITHDRAW

This case is before the Court on two motions. First, a motion for
order to show cause as to why Defendants and Counter-Claimants
Miramar Quick Service Restaurant Corporation, Silon Corporation,
Khalid Drihmi, and Abdel Drihmi should not be held in contempt for
violating the Court’s preliminary injunction order filed by Plaintiffs
Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc., and LC Trademarks, Inc. (“Little
Caesar’s”). ECF No. 59. And second, a motion to withdraw submitted by
counsel for Defendants. ECF No. 68.
In its show-cause motion, Little Caesar’s urges that, although
Defendants have stopped operating their franchises, they continue to
display Little Caesar’s property marks inside their now-closed
restaurants, in violation of the preliminary injunction order. Little
Caesar’s has offered to coordinate with Defendants’ landlords to facilitate
1

Case 2:18-cv-10767-TGB-EAS ECF No. 75 filed 05/26/20

PageID.1249

Page 2 of 5

removal of any remaining property marks from the former franchises.
ECF No. 70, PageID.1230. This is a reasonable and appropriate
approach, and the Court approves Little Caesar’s initiative to work with
Defendants’ former landlords to see that its marks are fully removed from
the properties. Should Little Caesar’s incur unusual or exorbitant
expenses in carrying out this work, it may submit a request for an award
of reasonable fees and costs for removing the remaining marks. In light
of the preceding, the motion to show cause, ECF No. 59, will be denied as
moot.
The Court will also grant defense counsel’s motion to withdraw,
ECF No. 68. Defendants shall have 14 days from the date of this Order
to retain new counsel or, in the case of the non-corporation Defendants,
to notify the Court whether they intend to retain counsel, or proceed pro
se. Once new counsel is retained and a notice of appearance filed, a status
conference will be scheduled to discuss revising the Scheduling Order.
Failure to comply with these instructions may result in default judgment
in favor of Little Caesar’s.
DISCUSSION
After Little Caesar’s filed its show-cause motion, Defendants
submitted a report describing the status of their compliance with the
preliminary injunction order. ECF No. 69. In that report, Defendants
explained they have been unable to gain access to their former
restaurants to remove the property marks inside. ECF No. 69,
2

Case 2:18-cv-10767-TGB-EAS ECF No. 75 filed 05/26/20

PageID.1250

Page 3 of 5

PageID.1217–18. The properties’ landlords have apparently changed the
locks and forbidden access by Defendants, who have not paid rent. See
id. Defendants have, however, provided Little Caesar’s with contact
information for the landlords, ECF No. 69-1, and Little Caesar’s has
agreed to work with the landlords to ensure all remaining property
marks are removed. ECF No. 70, PageID.1230. As requested, the Court
will allow Little Caesar’s to submit a request for an award of reasonable
fees and costs incurred in removing the marks—a task that should have
long ago been carried out by Defendants under the preliminary
injunction order. See ECF No. 70, PageID.1230.
Concerning defense counsel’s motion to withdraw, the Court finds
reason to permit Kerby Roberson to withdraw as counsel. Because all
artificial entities, including corporations, must be represented by counsel
to proceed in federal court, Defendants Miramar Quick Service
Restaurant Corporation, and Silon Corporation must retain new counsel
if they intend to defend the action. Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony Unit II
Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201–03 (1993). Failure to do so
may result in a default judgment. See Smith v. Comm’r, 926 F.2d 1470,
1475 (6th Cir. 1991) (“It is well established that courts have inherent
power to dismiss and/or enter a default when a party disobeys a court
order or otherwise interferes with the efficient administration of
justice.”); Dow Corning Corp. v. Jie Xiao, No. 11-10008, 2013 WL

3

Case 2:18-cv-10767-TGB-EAS ECF No. 75 filed 05/26/20

PageID.1251

Page 4 of 5

4039371, at *5 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 7, 2013) (“Courts have long had the
inherent authority to enter default as a sanction.”).
Although Defendants Khalid Drihmi, and Abdel Drihmi may
technically proceed pro se, that is, to represent themselves without the
assistance of counsel, if they decide to do so they will be personally
responsible for complying with all orders and deadlines set by the Court
or agreed to by the parties, including filing any motions, responses,
briefs, or other legal papers that may be required during the course of the
litigation. Any failure to appropriately defend the case by the Drihmis
may also result in default judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) (providing
authority for courts to enter default judgment against defendants who do
not “otherwise defend.”).
CONCLUSION
It is hereby ORDERED that the motion for order to show cause
filed by Plaintiffs Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc., and LC Trademarks,
Inc. is DENIED AS MOOT. Plaintiffs are instructed to file a brief status
report to the Court indicating whether the property marks have been
removed from the former Little Caesar’s franchises and, if necessary, to
submit an assessment of reasonable fees and costs incurred.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to withdraw filed by
defense counsel Kerby Roberson is GRANTED. Clarence Tucker, local
counsel, will also be withdrawn as counsel for defendant in this matter.

4

Case 2:18-cv-10767-TGB-EAS ECF No. 75 filed 05/26/20

PageID.1252

Page 5 of 5

Counsel is directed to immediately serve a copy of this Order on
Defendants Khalid Drihmi and Abdel Drihmi.
If Defendants and Counter-Claimants Miramar Quick Service
Restaurant Corporation, and Silon Corporation wish to further contest
this case, they are HEREBY ORDERED to retain counsel within 14
days of the date of this Order. Newly retained counsel must also file a
notice of appearance within that same timeframe.
Defendants Khalid Drihmi and Abdel Drihmi are hereby
ORDERED to retain counsel within 14 days of the date of this Order.
Newly retained counsel must also file a notice of appearance within that
same timeframe. If Defendants Khalid Drihmi and Abdel Drihmi do not
wish to retain counsel and intend to represent themselves, they must
NOTIFY the Court via email within 14 days of the date of this Order.
An email must be directed to [e-mail].
Failure to retain counsel or to otherwise defend the case and
prosecute Defendants’ counterclaims may result in default judgment.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 26, 2020

s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5