Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 5, 2025

Newman v. Maceno Pizza LLC

Judge
Kandis Westmore
Docket
4:25-cv-01105
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Newman v. Maceno Pizza, Judge Westmore struck the LLC owner’s attempted response and warned that failing to retain counsel could lead to default judgment.

Who this affects

Maceno Pizza LLC must respond through a licensed attorney rather than through Juraci Maceno Filho. The court warned that failing to respond by March 18, 2025, could ultimately lead to default judgment.

What happened

John Newman sued Maceno Pizza LLC, doing business as Monza Pizzeria. Juraci Maceno Filho, identified as the LLC’s owner, filed a statement denying the complaint’s allegations.

The court explained that an LLC must appear through a licensed attorney. Filho was not licensed to practice in California or admitted to practice in the district, so the court struck his statement to the extent it was intended as the LLC’s answer.

The court also warned that Maceno Pizza LLC’s failure to respond by March 18, 2025, could ultimately result in default judgment. Judge Kandis Westmore issued the order striking the statement; the court did not enter default judgment in this order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Newman v. Maceno Pizza LLC · No. 4:25-cv-01105
Judge
Kandis Westmore
Date
Mar. 5, 2025

Background

John Newman sued Maceno Pizza LLC, doing business as Monza Pizzeria. Juraci Maceno Filho, identified as the owner of Maceno Pizza LLC, filed a statement denying the allegations in the complaint.

Court’s reasoning

The court stated that a limited liability company must appear in court through an attorney. Filho was not licensed to practice law in California and was not admitted to practice in the Northern District of California. Therefore, to the extent his statement could be understood as Maceno Pizza LLC’s answer, it was not a valid filing for the LLC.

Ruling and effect

The court struck Filho’s statement under its inherent powers. The court also warned that Maceno Pizza LLC’s failure to respond to the complaint by March 18, 2025, could ultimately result in default judgment. This order did not enter default judgment. Judge Kandis Westmore issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.