Georkeshia Denise Campbell et al v. United States Postal Services et al

Filing 15

ORDER by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: denying 10 petitioners Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order without prejudice. (lc) Modified on 3/5/2012 (lc).

1
2

O

3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

Georkeshia Denise Campbell,
et al.,

12
Plaintiffs,
13
v.
14
William Fujioka, et al.,
15
16
17
18
19
20

Defendants.
___________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CV 11-10741 DDP (MLGx)
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER

[Dkt. No. 10]

Presently before the court is Petitioner Georkeshia Denise
Campbell’s Application for a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”).
A temporary restraining order is meant to be used only in

21

extraordinary circumstances.

22

the requesting party must show (1) that she is likely to succeed on

23

the merits, (2) that she is likely to suffer irreparable harm in

24

the absence of preliminary relief, (3) that the balance of equities

25

tips in her favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the public

26

interest.

27

374 (2008).

28

combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility

To establish entitlement to a TRO,

Winter v. Natural Res. Defense Counsel, 129 S.Ct. 365,
A TRO may be warranted where a party (1) shows a

1

of irreparable harm, or (2)raises serious questions and the balance

2

of hardships tips in favor of a TRO.

3

Air Lines, Inc., 819 F.2d 935, 937 (9th Cir. 1987).

4

formulations represent two points on a sliding scale in which the

5

required degree of irreparable harm increases as the probability of

6

success decreases.”

7

party must demonstrate a “fair chance of success on the merits” and

8

a “significant threat of irreparable injury.”1

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Id.

See Arcamuzi v. Continental
“These two

Under both formulations, however, the

Id.

Furthermore, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
65(b), a court may issue a temporary restraining order
without written or oral notice to the adverse party or its
attorney only if: (A) specific facts in an affidavit or a
verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable
injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the
adverse party can be heard in opposition; and (B) the movant’s
attorney certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice
and the reasons why it should not be required.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1) (emphasis added).
Petitioner acknowledges that she has not contacted Defendant

17

Jared Haskell, against whom she seeks a TRO.

18

Petitioner asserts that Defendant Haskell “has sought to provide

19

fraudulent documentation to induce an eviction process for which he

20

has no authority to impose” and that defendants “have furthermore

21

caused undo (sic) financial hardship upon the Plaintiff Ms.

22

Campbell and her minor children.”

23

information, however, the court cannot ascertain a threat of

24

immediate injury that would justify the lack of notice to

(Application at 2.)

(Memorandum at 1.)

Without more

25
1

26
27
28

Even under the “serious interests” sliding scale test, a
plaintiff must satisfy the four Winter factors and demonstrate
“that there is a likelihood of irreparable injury and that the
injunction is in the public interest.” Alliance for the Wild
Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1135 (9th Cir. 2011).
2

1

defendants, nor can the court determine that the Winter factors

2

have been met.

3
4

Accordingly, Petitioner’s Application for a Temporary
Restraining Order is DENIED without prejudice.

5
6
7

Dated: March 5, 2012

8

DEAN D. PREGERSON

9

United States District Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3