Stark et al v. Diageo Chateau & Estate Wines Company

Filing 86

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers Granting Motion for Clarification and Denying 83 Motion for Reconsideration. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/10/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 7 8 CHRISTIAN STARK et al., Plaintiffs, 9 vs. 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Case No.: 12-CV-04385 YGR ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION AND DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DIAGEO CHATEAU & ESTATE WINES COMPANY, 12 Defendant. 13 14 Plaintiffs move for clarification and reconsideration1 of the Court’s Order entering a 15 preliminary injunction. Having carefully considered the papers submitted and the pleadings in this 16 action, the Court hereby GRANTS Motion to the extent it requests Clarification of the Court’s 17 previous Order but DENIES Reconsideration of that Order.2 To comply with the preliminary injunction, Defendant has an obligation to ensure that its 18 19 distributors and retailers are not advertising, promoting, distributing, offering for sale or selling 20 Stark Raving wine in Sonoma County, California. If Stark Raving wine still is being sold in 21 Sonoma County, then Defendant has an obligation to ensure that Stark Wine is removed from the 22 retailers’ shelves. The Court hereby sets this matter for a Compliance Hearing for Friday, January 4, 2013, 23 24 on the Court’s 9:01 a.m. Calendar, in the Federal Courthouse, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, 25 California, Courtroom 5. 26 1 27 The Court construes the Motion for Reconsideration as a Request for Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration. See Civil L.R. 7-9. 28 2 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds this motion appropriate for decision without oral argument. 1 By no later than December 21, 2012, the Defendant shall file a one-page statement either: 2 (a) confirming that compliance is complete; or (b) setting forth an explanation for its failure to 3 comply. 4 5 If compliance is complete, the parties need not appear and the compliance hearing will be taken off calendar. Otherwise, personal appearance will be required. 6 This Order Terminates Docket Number 83. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 Date: December 10, 2012 ______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?