Free Order of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

5 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F I L E D
Fon THE NINTH CIRCUIT DSU 0 6 2005
°*5TL‘T 0¤30¥'E?i%%e°t‘t”“
AUTOMATION SYSTEMS No. 04-16588
MARKETING, _
D.C. N0. CV-04-005 19-PHX-WV S
I Plaintiff - Appellant, District of Arizona,
Phoenix
v. _ _ `
STANDARD AUTOMATION & ORDER
CONTROL,
Defendant - Appellee.
Before: FERNANDEZ and GRABER, Circuit Judges
Appellant’s motion for clarification of the court’s November 4, 2005 order is
granted. In addition to briefing the merits of the appeal, the parties shall address in
their briefs the issue of whether a non—attor11ey sole proprietor may represent the
prop1ietor’s own business in federal court. See Licht v. America Westrliriines, 400 2
F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 1994) (partner may not represent partnership); United States v.
High Country Broad. C0., 3 F.3d 1244 (9th Cir. 1993) (sole shareholder may not
represent corporation); C.E. Pape Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696 (9th
Cir. 1987) (trustees may not represent trusts); but see United Parcel Service cf
America v. The Net, Inc., 185 F.Supp 274 (E.D. N.Y. 2002) (owner may represent
S:\PROSE\pane1memos\recomnemos\2005\l2.05\04-16588.wpd
Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS Document 28 Filed 12/15/2005 Page 1 of 2

l 04-16588
sole proprietorship). This order is not a decision of the merits of the appeal or of _
the representation issue.
Briefing shall proceed as follows: appellant’s opening brief is due December
29, 2005; appellee’s answering brief is due January 30, 2006; and the optional
reply brief is due 14 days from service ofthe answering brief g
This panel continues to recuse itself from any further involvement in this
appeal.
s;\1>R0sE1pa¤e1m¤m¤s\re¤¤mmm¤sx200s\12.05104-1sssgwpd
Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS Document 28 Filed 12/15/2005 Page 2 of 2 -

Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS

Document 28

Filed 12/15/2005

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS

Document 28

Filed 12/15/2005

Page 2 of 2