Estate of Johnson Clark et al v. Horwich et al

Filing 70

ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO MOTION AND SETTING HEARING. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 3/12/2012. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/12/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. C 12-00137 CRB

ESTATE OF JOHNSON CLARK ET AL.,

ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO
MOTION AND SETTING HEARING

Plaintiffs,
v.
HORWICH ET AL.,
Defendants.

/

16
17

On March 5, 2012, this Court denied pro se Plaintiff Peter Clark’s application for a

18

temporary restraining order, which asked the Court to freeze all assets related to the Clark

19

Assets, turn over documents, and ban Defendants from taking numerous actions in

20

connection with numerous funds. See Order Denying TRO (dkt. 32). The Court ordered

21

that, if Plaintiff wished to pursue injunctive relief, and/or arbitration, he was to file and

22

notice a motion in conformance with Civil Local Rule 7-2, and to serve that motion on all of

23

the Defendants in conformance with Civil Local Rules 5-5 and 5-6. Id.

24

Plaintiff has now filed two additional motions. The first, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel

25

Arbitration, was filed March 8, 2012 and calendared for March 9, 2012. See Motion to

26

Compel (dkt. 60). This filing violates Civil Local Rule 7-2, which requires that motions be

27

noticed for hearing “no less than thirty-five days after service,” and is therefore RE-SET for

28

Friday, April 20, 2012, at 10:00 am. The second, Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary

1

Restraining Order, was also calendared for March 9, 2012. See Mot. for TRO (dkt. 59).

2

Although the Court had also ordered that any request for injunctive relief comply with Rule

3

7-2, the Court understands that Plaintiff maintains that there is “tremendous immediacy” in

4

this case. See id. at 3. Accordingly, the Court hereby DIRECTS the Defendants, whom

5

Plaintiff represents that he has served, see Certificate of Service (dkt. 61), to file any

6

opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 14, 2012, and SETS the

7

Motion for a hearing on Friday, March 16, 2012 at 10:00 am.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: March 12, 2012

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

G:\CRBALL\2012\137\order setting hearing.wpd

2