Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Procedural orderFiled Aug. 25, 2026

Gruns Nutrition v. It Girl Wellness LLC D/B/A It Girl Vitamins

Full caption

Gruns Nutrition, Inc. v. It Girl Wellness LLC D/B/A It Girl Vitamins ET AL, et al.

Judge
James Donato
Docket
3:26-cv-00288
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1

Counsel2 of record
PLAINTIFF
Holly M. Petersen Morrison & Foerster LLP
Joyce Liou Morrison & Foerster LLP

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.

Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Gruns Nutrition v. It Girl Wellness, Judge Donato ordered both parties' lawyers to explain by September 11, 2026, why sanctions should not be imposed for missing a court conference.

Who this affects

Attorneys for both Gruns Nutrition, Inc. and It Girl Wellness LLC, who must respond by September 11, 2026, to avoid potential sanctions; It Girl Wellness LLC itself, which is warned it must retain a licensed attorney to appear in court.

What happened

In Gruns Nutrition, Inc. v. It Girl Wellness LLC d/b/a It Girl Vitamins, neither the plaintiff's nor the defendant's attorney showed up to a scheduled case management conference in federal court, and both absences were unexcused.

The court issued an order requiring each attorney to explain, by September 11, 2026, why they should not be financially penalized for missing the conference. The plaintiff's attorney faces the additional burden of explaining why the case itself should not be thrown out for failing to move the lawsuit forward, under a federal rule that allows dismissal when a plaintiff neglects to pursue a case.

Judge James Donato also warned defendant It Girl Wellness LLC that, as a corporation, it is legally required to be represented by a licensed attorney and cannot have a non-lawyer speak or file papers on its behalf. The court's order does not resolve any underlying dispute — it is a procedural warning that sets a deadline for both sides to respond.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gruns Nutrition v. It Girl Wellness LLC D/B/A It Girl Vitamins · No. 3:26-cv-00288
Judge
James Donato
Date
Aug. 25, 2026

Background

This is a federal civil case filed by plaintiff Gruns Nutrition, Inc. against defendant It Girl Wellness LLC, doing business as It Girl Vitamins, in the Northern District of California. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or causes of action.

What Happened

Neither counsel for Gruns Nutrition nor counsel for It Girl Wellness appeared at a scheduled case management conference as directed by the court. The court found both absences to be unexcused.

The Order to Show Cause

An "order to show cause" is a court directive requiring a party or attorney to appear or submit a written explanation as to why a particular consequence — here, sanctions or dismissal — should not be imposed.

The court issued the following directives:

As to both counsel

Each attorney must show cause by September 11, 2026, why sanctions (financial penalties) should not be imposed for failing to appear at the case management conference.

As to plaintiff's counsel specifically

Counsel for Gruns Nutrition must additionally show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute — meaning failure to actively pursue the lawsuit. The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which authorizes a court to dismiss an action when the plaintiff fails to prosecute it.

As to It Girl Wellness LLC

The court advised that a corporation, as a matter of law, may only appear in federal court through a licensed attorney. A non-lawyer acting on a corporation's behalf (appearing "pro se," meaning without a lawyer) is not permitted. The court cited Local Civil Rule 3-9(b) and the Supreme Court decision Rowland v. California Men's Colony (1993), as well as a prior order from this judge in a separate case.

What This Order Does Not Do

This order does not dismiss the case, impose sanctions, or resolve any merits of the dispute between the parties. It sets a response deadline and puts both sides on notice of potential consequences. No final judgment was entered.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.