Brosnan v. Gul Auto Care

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOHN BROSNAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
GUL AUTO CARE,
Defendant.
Case No. 25-cv-08078-TLT (SK)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Regarding Docket No. 11
On January 2, 2026, Hamad Gul, proceeding pro se on behalf of Defendant Gul Auto Care
(“Defendant”), filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff John Brosnan’s Complaint. (Dkt. No. 11.) The
Court scheduled a motion hearing for March 16, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. via Public Zoom Webinar.
(Dkt. No. 13.)
Pursuant to Northern District of California Civil Local Rule 3-9(b), “[a] corporation,
unincorporated association, partnership or other such entity may appear only through a member of
the bar of this Court.” Civ. L. R. 3-9(b). Because the Defendant in this action is a business, Mr.
Gul cannot file motions in this action without an attorney. See Rittenhouse Snoddy v. TEEMA,
Inc., No. 4:25-CV-04563-KAW, 2025 WL 1635866, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 9, 2025) (finding that
because the plaintiff was a corporation, it could participate in the litigation without an attorney).
Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS Defendant to show cause in writing no later than
February 20, 2026 why this Court should not strike the motion to dismiss.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 20, 2026
______________________________________
SALLIE KIM
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:25-cv-08078-SK Document 19 Filed 01/20/26 Page 1 of 1