Amador v. Quicken Loans, Inc. et al

Filing 9

ORDER DENYING Motion for TRO 8 , signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 11/18/16. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

Daniel Amador,
Plaintiff,

10
11

Quicken Loans, Inc. et al.,

13

ORDER

vs.

12

No. CV 16-1357-SMM

Defendants.

14

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 7)

15

and Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 8). Plaintiff says he will

16

suffer immediate and irreparable injury if Defendants are not enjoined from proceeding

17

with foreclosure on his property. (Doc. 7 at 5, Doc. 8 at 5.) Plaintiff has not notified

18

Defendants of these motions.

19

On November 10, 2016, Defendant DVP, LP obtained a lawful writ of possession

20

against Plaintiff in the Superior Court of California, County of Fresno. (Doc. 7 at 79-80,

21

Doc. 8 at 80-81.) Pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), this Court will

22

abstain from granting injunctive relief when a state civil proceeding is pending against

23

the Plaintiff at the time he commences the federal action. It is apparent Plaintiff wishes

24

the Court to forestall the foreclosure action, which this Court will not do.

25

Moreover, Plaintiff has failed to serve Defendants, despite filing his complaint on

26

September 14, 2016. As such, the Court finds that it would be prejudicial to grant

27

Plaintiff injunctive relief even if the circumstances warranted such relief.

28

1

Accordingly,

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion for Temporary

3
4

Restraining Order (Doc. 8).
Dated this 18th day of November, 2016.

5
6
7

Honorable Stephen M. McNamee
Senior United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-