United States Court of Appeals
                           FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 08-2738
                                    ___________

City of Kansas City, Missouri,                 *
                                               *
               Appellee,                       *
                                               * Appeal from the United States
        v.                                     * District Court for the Western
                                               * District of Missouri.
Housing & Economic Development                 *
Financial Corporation,                         * [UNPUBLISHED]
                                               *
               Appellee,                       *
                                               *
David Bahner,                                  *
                                               *
               Appellee,                       *
                                               *
-------------------------------------------    *
                                               *
Warren Watkins,                                *
                                               *
               Appellant.                      *
                                          ___________

                              Submitted: February 22, 2010
                                 Filed: February 25, 2010
                                  ___________

Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
                         ___________

PER CURIAM.
        Appearing pro se, Warren Watkins appeals from the district court’s1 orders
denying pleadings that he filed on behalf of Monarch Community Improvement
Council (Monarch). As a preliminary matter, we have an independent obligation to
consider our own jurisdiction. See Thomas v. Basham, 

, 522-23 (8th Cir.
1991). We conclude that the pleadings Watkins filed were not properly before the
district court, see Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, 

, 202-03 (1993)
(artificial entities may appear in federal courts only through licensed attorneys); the
notice of appeal, which Watkins purported to file pro se on Monarch’s behalf, was
ineffective to perfect this appeal, see United States v. Van Stelton, 

, 70
(8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (corporation that was not represented by counsel was not
party to appeal; corporation cannot appear pro se); and Watkins lacks standing to
present arguments on his own behalf on appeal, see United States v. Northshore
Mining Co., 

, 847 (8th Cir. 2009) (examining whether party was
aggrieved by district court’s order, such that appellate court had jurisdiction over
appeal); City of Clarkson Valley v. Mineta, 

, 569 (8th Cir. 2007)
(standing is jurisdictional prerequisite that must be resolved before reaching merits of
suit). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
                         ______________________________




      1
        The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.

                                          -2-