Tokareva v. Security Service Provider Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ASYA TOKAREVA, Plaintiff, ORDER — against — 20 Civ. 9867 (ER) SECURITY SERVICE PROVIDER CORP., Defendant. RAMOS, D.J.: On December 2, 2020, Defendant, through its alleged owner, filed a letter requesting to proceed pro se in the instant suit. Doc. 7. This Circuit has made clear that “a layperson may not represent a separate legal entity such as a corporation.” Lattanzio v. COMTA, 481 F.3d 137, 139 (2d Cir. 2007). Accordingly, “a company may not appear pro se but rather must be represented by counsel.” Omega Consulting v. Farrington Mfg. Co., 604 F. Supp. 2d 684, 684 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Defendant’s request to appear without counsel is therefore denied. Failure to have counsel appear on behalf of the corporation may result in the entry of a default judgment against Defendant. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 7, 2020 oi ) New York, New York ee a EDGARDO RAMOS, U.S.D.J.