Scholz Design, Inc. v. Stone Ridge Custom Homes, Inc. et al - Document 16

FH1T(19 DEC 8 i5:4:3IJSIiI>fWP I N T H E UNITED STATES D I S T R I C T C O U R T F O R T H E D I S T R I C T OF O R E G O N S C H O L Z D E S I G N , INC., Plaintiff, v. S T O N E R I D G E C U S T O M HOMES, INC.; D E L S O N E N G I N E E R I N G , INC.; C H R I S T I N E L. S I R P L E S S , individually; and CHRISTINE L . SIRPLESS in her capacity as personal representative o f the E S T A T E OF WILLIAM J. SIRPLESS, Defendants. ) Civil No. 09-10 18-JE ) ) FINDINGS A N D ) RECOMMENDATION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Cassie K . K e l l o g g Laura T. Z. M o n t g o m e l y G l e a v e s S w e a r i n g e n P o t t e r & S c o t t , LLP 975 O a k Street, Suite 800 E u g e n e , O R 97401 Attorneys for P l a i n t i f f FINDINGS A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N - I  JELDERKS, Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff Scholz Design, Inc., brings this copyright infringement action against defendants Stone Ridge Custom Homes, Inc., Delson Engineering, Inc. (Delson), and Christine Sirpless. P l a i n t i f f moves to strike the appearance o f defendant Delson, and to strike Delson's answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims. Plaintiff correctly notes that defendant Delson, a corporation, has filed a pro se answer, which includes affirmative defenses and counterclaims. This responsive pleading indicates that i t is submitted by "Delson Engineering Inc.," and is signed by John Delson, "P.E. (president)." Plaintiff also correctly notes that only individuals may appear pro se in federal courts, and therefore that a corporation must be represented by a n attorney i n this court. See,~, United States v. High County Broadcasting Co., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9 th Cir. 1993). Defendant Delson has n o t filed any opposition to p l a i n t i f f s ' m o t i o n to strike. The motion is well taken, and should be granted. CONCLUSION Plaintiffs m o t i o n to strike defendant Delson Engineering, Inc. 's pro se appearance, answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims (# 10) should be GRANTED. SCHEDULING O R D E R The Findings and Recommendation will be referred to a district judge. Objections, i f a n y , are due December 30, 2009. I f n o objections are filed, then the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement on that' date. F I N D I N G S AND R E C O M M E N D A T I O N - 2  If objections are filed, then a response is due within 14 days after being served with a copy o f the objections. When the response is due or filed, whichever date is earlier, the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement. DATED this 8th day o f December, 2009. U.S. Magistrate Judge l:k~-- FINDINGS AND R E C O M M E N D A T I O N - 3