Ely v. United States Department of Education

Filing 4

ORDER re TRO. Signed by Judge James Donato on 5/25/2017. (jdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/25/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MIKE JOHN ELY,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 17-cv-03006-JD
ORDER RE TRO

v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION,
Defendant.

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff Mike John Ely, appearing pro se, requests a temporary restraining order relating to
a garnishment action in a student loan collection dispute. Dkt. No. 1. The request is denied.
Ely did not serve the TRO papers on the United States. Civil Local Rule 65-1(b) provides

16

that, “[u]nless relieved by order of a Judge for good cause shown, on or before the day of an ex

17

parte motion for a temporary restraining order, counsel applying for the temporary restraining

18

order must deliver notice of such motion to opposing counsel or party.” Here, the moving papers

19

provide no indication that notice was provided and Ely has not established good cause for relief

20

from this requirement.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1) permits a temporary restraining order without
notice to the adverse party when:
(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.

The TRO request does not fall within these provisions. Ely makes generalized statements

1
2

about how garnishment will harm his ability to care for his children and put him at “significant

3

risk of permanent financial disruption,” but he does not provide any specific facts clearly showing

4

immediate and irreparable harm along these lines. See Dkt. No. 1 at 3. He has also not certified in

5

writing any attempts to give notice to defendant. Consequently, a TRO is not warranted at this

6

time.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 25, 2017

9
10
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2