Little Wishes v. Little Wish Foundation

Filing 38

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on 02/24/17. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2017)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

LITTLE WISHES,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

LITTLE WISH FOUNDATION,
Defendant.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 16-cv-06613-MMC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Re: Dkt. Nos. 20, 34

12
13

Before the Court is plaintiff Little Wishes’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed

14

January 20, 2017. Defendant Little Wishes Foundation has filed opposition, to which

15

plaintiff has replied. The matter came on regularly for hearing on February 24, 2017.

16

Richard Proctor Doyle, Jr. of Doyle Low LLP appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Stuart E.

17

Jones of Nielsen, Haley & Abbott LLP appeared on behalf of defendant.

18

The Court having considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the

19

motion,1 as well as the arguments of counsel at the hearing, the motion is, for the

20

reasons stated on the record at the hearing, hereby DENIED without prejudice.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23

Dated: February 24, 2017
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

24
25
1

26
27
28

Following the filing of the reply, defendant filed a “Motion to Strike Evidence
Improperly Submitted with Plaintiff’s Reply and Argument Thereon, or Alternatively, to
Consider Responsive Evidence and Briefing.” The Court, for the reasons set forth at the
hearing, GRANTS defendant’s alternative request and, accordingly, has considered the
responsive evidence and briefing submitted therewith.