Synopsys, Inc. v. Sunlune Corporation
- Beth Freeman
- 5:24-cv-00220
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Synopsys v. Sunlune, Judge Freeman granted Synopsys’s motion to strike Sunlune’s answer because corporations must appear through licensed counsel.
Sunlune Corporation must appear through licensed counsel by May 23, 2024, or Synopsys may seek entry of default and default judgment.
What happened
In Synopsys, Inc. v. Sunlune Corporation, Synopsys asked the court to strike Sunlune Corporation’s answer. The motion was unopposed.
The court granted the motion and struck Sunlune’s answer because it had been filed without a lawyer, and corporations may appear in court only through licensed counsel. The court also canceled the scheduled hearing.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman gave Sunlune 30 days, until May 23, 2024, to appear through counsel. If no lawyer appeared by then, Synopsys could seek entry of default and later seek default judgment.
The detailed version
- Synopsys, Inc. v. Sunlune Corporation · No. 5:24-cv-00220
- Beth Freeman
- Apr. 23, 2024
Background
Synopsys, Inc. filed an unopposed motion to strike Sunlune Corporation’s answer. The answer had been filed by Sunlune acting without a lawyer.
Ruling
The court granted the motion and struck Sunlune’s answer. It explained that a corporation cannot represent itself in federal court and may proceed only through a licensed attorney. The court found that the motion could be decided without oral argument and vacated the hearing previously set for August 8, 2024.
The court gave Sunlune 30 days, until May 23, 2024, to appear through counsel. The order states that if counsel did not appear by that deadline, Synopsys could file a motion for the clerk’s entry of default and later file a motion for default judgment. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
Effect of the Order
The ruling affects Sunlune’s ability to participate in the case and sets a deadline for obtaining counsel. It also permits Synopsys to seek default-related relief if Sunlune does not meet the deadline, but the opinion does not state that default or default judgment had already been entered.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.