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


File Size: 48.3 kB
Pages: 2
Date: November 8, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 404 Words, 2,524 Characters
Page Size: 622.08 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/43425/26.pdf

Download Order of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona ( 48.3 kB)


Preview Order of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona
' UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F I L E D
FOR THE CIRCUIT g NOV U 4 2005
°“5féTé¤3’Al’§*t%'$et“§““
I AUTOMATION SYSTEMS No. 04-16588
MARKETING,
D.C. N0. CV-04-00519-PHX-JWS
Plaintiff- Appellant, District of Arizona,
Phoenix
v.
STANDARD AUTOMATION & ORDER
CONTROL, .
L Defendant - Appellee. `
Before: FERNANDEZ and GRABER, Circuit Judges - L
Upon further review of the record in this appeal, we sua sponte grant
reconsideration of our February 16, 2005 order denying Mr. Henry’s motion for
l leave to represent appellant Automation Systems Marketing, a sole proprietorship
owned by Mr. Henry. The February 16, 2005 order is vacated and Mr. Henry’s
motion to represent appellant is granted. The March 23, 2005 order dismissing the
appeal for failure to comply with the February 16 order is also vacated, the
mandate is recalled and the appeal is reinstated. p
Briefing shall proceed as follows: appellant’s opening brief is due December I
9, 2005; appellee’s answering brief is due January 9, 2006; and the optional reply _
S:\PROSE\panelmemos\reconmemos\2005\1 1 .05\04-165 88.w·pd I
Case 2:04-cv-OO519—JWS Document 26 Filed 11/O9/2005 Page 1 of 2

' 04-16588
brief is due I4 days from service of the answering brief. The parties shall address
at their briefs the issue of whether a non—attomey sole proprietor may represent the
iaroprietofs own business in federal court. See Licht v. America West Airlines, 40
iF.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. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696 (9th
Cir. 1987) (trustees may not represent trusts); but see United Parcel Service af
America v. The Net, Inc., 185 F .Supp 274 (E.D. N.Y. 2002) (owner may represent
sole proprietorship). 8 `
This panel recuses itself from any further involvement in this appeal. p
A mus ccev
= cmev A. cansrtsozv
Clerk of Court
· Arrest
5 ‘ ( $§jl_0§ll1B-_4.20D5
jj- af QN.; ,
A " [gy, R v¤i>ée».__'fEt,Iaat
A. 5 Jepmvicea
S :\PROSE\panelmc-:mos\1·eco1unemos\2005\ 1 1 .O5\04— 1 65 82.wpd
Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS Document 26 Filed 11/O9/2005 Page 2 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS

Document 26

Filed 11/09/2005

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00519-JWS

Document 26

Filed 11/09/2005

Page 2 of 2