Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-04254/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-04254-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

SENAH, INC,

Plaintiff,

v.

XI'AN FORSTAR S&T CO, LTD,

Defendant.

Case No. 13-cv-04254-BLF 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: 

STRIKING THE ANSWER FOR 

FAILURE TO HAVE COUNSEL

To Defendant Xi’an Forstar S&T Co., Ltd. and its Attorney of Record, if any: You are 

hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the answer should not be stricken for failure to be 

represented by counsel. On September 24, 2015, Defendant’s counsel (“King and Spalding”) filed 

an emergency motion to withdraw as counsel. ECF 131. According to King and Spalding, 

Defendant Xi’an Forstar S&T Co., Ltd. (“Forstar”) terminated counsel’s representation of Forstar 

and directed counsel to stop all work in this matter. Id. at 1. King and Spalding does not know, 

and Defendant has not informed the Court if new counsel will or has been retained. Id. On 

September 28, 2015, the Court granted King and Spalding’s emergency motion to withdraw as 

counsel. ECF 133.

Defendant Forstar is hereby apprised that it cannot appear pro se in this civil action. See 

e.g., Bigelow v. Brady, 179 F.3d 1164, 1165 (9th Cir. 1999) (“The law is clear that a corporation 

can be represented only by a licensed attorney.”); see also Batac Development Corp. v. B&R 

Consultants, Inc., No. 98-Civ-721-CSH, 2000 WL 307400, at *1-*2 (S.D.N.Y. March 23, 2000) (a 

non-attorney individual, even the corporation’s sole shareholder, cannot represent the corporation 

in the federal courts). 

Case 5:13-cv-04254-BLF Document 134 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Accordingly, Defendant Forstar is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the answer should 

not be stricken for failure to be represented by counsel. Defendant Forstar shall submit a written 

response on or before October 8, 2015 and a hearing shall be set on October 15, 2015 at 9 a.m. 

in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 

In the alternative, if Defendant Forstar retains an attorney and has that attorney file a notice 

of appearance before October 8, 2015, the Court will discharge this order to show cause. The 

Court advises Defendant Forstar that a failure to respond will cause Defendant’s answer to be 

stricken. If the answer is stricken, Plaintiff may file a request to enter default against Defendant 

Forstar which could result in judgment being entered against Defendant Forstar.

The Court instructs the clerk to serve this order by mail, e-mail, and fax on:

Name: Lily Cai

Address: No 71 Jinye Road Hi-Tech Zone

Xian 710077 China

E-mail: market@forstar.com.cn

Fax No: +86-29-88243212

and

Name: Jerry Guo

Address: AVIC Forstar S&T Co., LTD

No. 71 Jinye Road

High-Tech Zone

Xian 710077 China

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 29, 2015

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:13-cv-04254-BLF Document 134 Filed 09/29/15 Page 2 of 2