CAROL MIRANDO, Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court upon review of Astro Tax Services LLC's letter response to Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint (Doc. 21) filed on February 6, 2017. Because the letter requests that this action be dismissed, the Court construes it as a motion to dismiss. Id. Although Naveen Mathur is named as an individual defendant, he has signed the letter on behalf of Astro Tax Services LLC's. Id. It does not appear that Naveen Mathur has filed a response on his behalf.
According to Local Rule 2.03(e), a corporation may only appear and be heard through counsel admitted to practice in the Court pursuant to Local Rules 2.01 or 2.02. A corporation can never appear pro se. Obermaier v. Driscoll, No. 2:00-cv-214-FtM-29D, 2000 WL 33175446, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 13, 2000). Because Astro Tax Services LLC is a corporate Defendant, it must be represented by counsel.
In accordance with Local Rule 2.03(e), the instant motion is denied without prejudice. Astro Tax Services LLC shall have up to and including March 6, 2017 to cause a Notice of Appearance be filed by the attorney to represent it and to respond to Plaintiff's operative complaint.
Furthermore, in an abundance of cation and because the individual Defendant Naveen Mathur seems to be appearing pro se, the Court will sua sponte extend his deadline to respond to the operative complaint up to and including March 6, 2017. Similarly, Naveen Mathur is cautioned that failure to comply with this Order may result in sanctions, including entry of a Clerk's default and default judgment against him.
ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby