Just Coffee, Inc. v. Gerlach et al
ORDER STRIKING the answer (Doc. No. 6) asto Dilworth Espresso. Dilworth Espresso LLC must retain counsel within fourteen (14) days from the date of this order or default will be entered against it. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 11/20/2014. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (tmg)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
DOCKET NO. 3:14-cv-00601-FDW-DCK
JUST COFFEE, INC.
PHILIPP GERLACH and DILWORTH )
THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte after Defendant’s Pro Se Answer and
Counterclaim. (Doc. No. 6).
On October 28, 2014, Plaintiff filed this trademark infringement action. (Doc. No. 1).
The docket reflects that both Mr. Gerlach, the individual defendant, and Dilworth Espresso,
L.L.C., the business defendant, were served on November 5, 2014. (Docs. Nos. 4, 5).
On November 19, 2014, Mr. Gerlach filed a purported pro se answer on behalf of himself
and Dilworth Espresso. (Doc. No. 6). Notably, Defendant Dilworth Espresso has failed to retain
counsel; it appears from the answer that Mr. Gerlach is attempting to represent both himself and
Concerning the business Defendant’s failure to retain counsel, “[i]t has been the law for
the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may appear in federal courts only through
licensed counsel.” Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993); see also,
Microsoft Corp. v. Computer Serv. & Repair, Inc., 312 F.Supp.2d 779, 780 (E.D.N.C. 2004).
This rule has been extended to “all forms of business entities.”
F.Supp.2d 563, 566-67 (M.D.N.C. 2004).
Gilley v. Shoffner, 345
The Court notes that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the District Court’s
decision to “reject” a pro se corporate defendant’s Answer and instead enter default judgment
against that party. See Allied Colloids, Inc. v. Jadair, Inc., 139 F.3d. 887 (table) 1998 WL
112719, *1 (4th Cir. 1998) (“almost every court to address this issue has held that a corporation
may not appear pro se but must be represented by duly licensed counsel”); see also Rhino
Assoc., L.P. v. Berg. Manuf. & Sales Corp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2379 (M.D. Pa. 2008)
(granting default judgment against corporate defendant where court allowed counsel to
withdraw, set a deadline for retaining replacement counsel, and defendant did not comply);
Blakewell v. Fed. Fin Group, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82279 (N.D. Ga. 2007) (same);
Microsoft Corp. v. Moss, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73672 (N.D. Ga. 2007) (same).
Because Defendant Dilworth Espresso LLC has failed to retain counsel, as evidenced by
his Phillip Gerlach’s unaccompanied signature on the answer, the Court STRIKES the answer as
to Dilworth Espresso. Dilworth Espresso LLC must retain counsel within fourteen (14) days
from the date of this order or default will be entered against it. The Clerk is directed to send
copies of this Order to both defendants at the following addresses:
10207 Wildbracken Ct.
Charlotte, NC 28210
Dilworth Espresso L.L.C
P.O. Box 472005
Charlotte, NC 28147
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: November 20, 2014
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?