Britware Consulting, Inc. v. Con-Tech Manufacturing, Inc.

Filing 41

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION TO FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL. (See order for details) (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright on 5/5/2021. (RJE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Britware Consulting, Inc.,

Case No. 20-cv-1006 (WMW/BRT)
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION TO
FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL

v.
Con-Tech Manufacturing, Inc.,
Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on Steve Allen’s pro se letter request, on behalf of
Plaintiff Britware Consulting, Inc., for an extension of the deadline to file a notice of
appeal. 1 (Dkt. 40.)

On March 26, 2021, this Court granted Defendant Con-Tech

Manufacturing, Inc.’s motion to dismiss and dismissed Britware’s complaint without
prejudice. According to Allen’s letter, Britware’s counsel recently passed away while she
was in the process of filing an appeal of the judgment dismissing this case.
Although Allen does not cite a rule in support of his request, the Court construes his
pro se filing liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). The Court is
mindful that a corporation cannot be represented pro se in a federal court. See Rowland v.
Cal. Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201–02 (1993) (holding
that a corporation cannot appear in federal court except through a licensed attorney).
However, in this case, the death of Britware’s counsel during the limited time in which

1

The record is unclear as to Allen’s precise relationship to Britware, but he purports
to be acting on Britware’s behalf.

Britware may file an appeal is an exceptional circumstance that supports consideration of
Allen’s pro se request to provide Britware additional time to find a licensed attorney to
represent Britware.
In a civil case, a notice of appeal “must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days
after entry of the judgment.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). As such, Britware’s deadline to
file a notice of appeal of this Court’s March 26, 2021 entry of judgment was April 25, 2021.
A district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if a moving party shows
“excusable neglect or good cause.”2 Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)(ii). The extension may
not exceed “30 days after the prescribed time or 14 days after the date when the order
granting the motion is entered, whichever is later.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(C).
Allen represents that Britware’s counsel died while in the process of filing an appeal,
and that Allen is “in the process of locating an attorney to represent Britware.”
Consequently, Britware seeks the full 30-day extension permitted under Rule 4(a)(5) of the
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The Court concludes that Britware has

demonstrated good cause for a 30-day extension of the time to file a notice of appeal in this
case.

2

A request for an extension of time to appeal must be filed before the 30-day period
for filing an appeal has expired. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)(i). Here, Allen’s letter request
is dated April 24, 2021, which is within Britware’s 30-day appeal period.
2

ORDER
Based on the foregoing analysis and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED that Britware Consulting, Inc., may file a notice of appeal no
later than May 25, 2021.
Dated: May 5, 2021

s/Wilhelmina M. Wright
Wilhelmina M. Wright
United States District Judge

3