Hayes v. Dajani et al,

Filing 23

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen conditionally denying 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, etc. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

GREG HAYES,

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

No. C-11-1702 EMC

Plaintiff,
v.
MUSA DAJANI, et al.,
Defendants.

13

ORDER CONDITIONALLY DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AS
MOOT; AND REQUIRING RESPONSE
TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR STAY
(Docket Nos. 2, 22)

___________________________________/
14
15
16

Plaintiff Greg Hayes has filed suit against Defendants Musa and Khaled Dajani, asserting

17

various causes of action, including one for copyright infringement. Currently pending before the

18

Court is Mr. Hayes’s motion for preliminary injunction in which he seeks to enjoin the Dajanis from

19

building a “parklet” based on a drawing that he allegedly co-authored and owns.

20

On August 19, 2011, this Court issued an order instructing the parties to meet and confer to

21

determine whether Mr. Hayes’s motion could be resolved by a stipulation between the parties. See

22

Docket No. 20 (order). On August 31, 2011, the Dajanis filed a case management statement,

23

informing the Court that they had tried to meet and confer with Mr. Hayes but his telephone number

24

was not a working number and he failed to respond to an e-mail they sent to him. The Dajanis

25

added that, if the Court were to deny the motion, then they would be willing to agree, during the

26

course of litigation, not to use the drawing at issue or otherwise construct a parklet that has the

27

critical characteristics of curved corners and/or a curved central feature. See Docket No. 21 (Defs.’

28

St. at 2) (stating that “Defendants feel very strongly against having the motion for preliminary

1

injunction granted as Defendants believe this will give some level of credibility to an otherwise

2

baseless and meritless claim against Defendants”). It now appears that Defendants were never able

3

to contact Mr. Hayes because he was arrested and is currently incarcerated. See Docket No. 22

4

(letter from Mr. Hayes). The Court, however, recently received a letter from Mr. Hayes in which he

5

essentially conceded that “[t]he Dajanis actually changed the design before building.” Id. (Letter at

6

5).

7

Taking into account the above, the Court shall conditionally deny Mr. Hayes’s motion as

8

moot. The denial is conditioned on each of the Dajanis filing and serving a declaration certifying

9

that, during the course of the litigation, he and/or his agents shall not use the drawing at issue or
otherwise construct a parklet that has the critical characteristics of curved corners and/or a curved

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

central feature. The declarations shall be filed by September 23, 2011.

12

The Court also takes this opportunity to address the requests for relief made by Mr. Hayes in

13

his submission filed on September 13, 2011. See Docket No. 22 (submission from Mr. Hayes).

14

Based on the Court’s review, Mr. Hayes appears to be asking the Court (1) to stay this litigation

15

pending his release from county jail, (2) to send a copy of his September 13 submission as well as

16

the entire court file to him (in county jail), and (3) to send a copy of his September 13 submission to

17

Matt Gonzalez in the San Francisco Public Defender’s office.

18

On the first request for relief, the Court hereby orders the Dajanis to file by September 23,

19

2011, a response to the request for a stay.

20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///

2

1
2

///
On the second request for relief, as a one-time courtesy, the Court shall send to Mr. Hayes a

3

copy of his September 13 submission, along with a copy of this order. However, the Court cannot

4

accommodate the remainder of his request (i.e., his request for a copy of the entire court file).

5

Although Mr. Hayes’s application for in forma pauperis was granted, that entitled him to a waiver of

6

the filing fee only. For the same reason, the Court cannot accommodate Mr. Hayes’s third request

7

for relief.

8

This order disposes of Docket No. 2.

9
IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

Dated: September 16, 2011

13
_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

GREG HAYES,

5
6
7
8

No. C-11-1702 EMC

Plaintiff,
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

MUSA DAJANI, et al.,
Defendants.

9
___________________________________/
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.

12
13
14

That on September 16, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said
envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle
located in the Clerk's office.

15
16
17

Greg Hayes
381 Oak Street
San Francisco, CA 94102

18
19
20
21

Greg Hayes
SF #554957
CJ5 4B-4
P. O. Box 67
San Bruno, CA 94066

22
Dated: September 16, 2011
23

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Betty Lee, Deputy Clerk

24
25
26
27
28

4