Quick Plug, B.V., et al v. International Horticultural Technologies, LLC et al

Filing 64

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 51 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 10 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; terminating 14 Motion for Pr eliminary Injunction; granting 25 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; denying 29 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Parties to show cause why action should not be dismissed or in alternative stayed until arbitration concludes. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/9/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9

QUICK PLUG, B.V., et al.,

10

Plaintiffs,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.
INTERNATIONAL HORTICULTURAL
TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

14

For the reasons stated on the record during the motion hearing held on the Court’s 2:00 p.m.

15
16

Case No.: 13-CV-3825 YGR

calendar on Tuesday, October 8, 2013:

17



Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. No. 291) is DENIED;

18



Plaintiffs’ Objections to Defendants’ Evidence (Dkt. No. 56) are OVERRULED2; and

19



Plaintiffs’ Motions to Seal (Dkt. Nos. 10, 25, 51) are GRANTED.

20

The declaratory relief sought in Plaintiffs’ Complaint centers on preventing an already-

21

commenced arbitration from progressing to a determination of the merits, alleging a risk that the

22

arbitrator will make rulings adverse to Plaintiffs. See Dkt. No. 1 (Complaint) ¶¶ 36-58. The parties

23

stipulated to, and the Court ordered, a stay of the arbitration during the pendency of the subject

24
25
26
27
28

1

2

Plaintiffs’ initial Motion was filed as Docket No. 14, which shall be terminated administratively.

“Any evidentiary and procedural objections to the opposition must be contained within the reply
brief or memorandum.” Civ. L.R. 7-3(c). Further, the Court may give weight to inadmissible
evidence during preliminary injunction proceedings, including by making credibility
determinations, e.g., Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 11-CV-01846-LHK, 2011 WL
7036077, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2011), hence Plaintiffs’ evidentiary objections are moot.

1

Motion. Dkt. No. 34. The stay is now lifted, as the Court’s Order provided that if the Court were

2

to deny Plaintiffs’ Motion, “the Arbitration may immediately resume.” Id. ¶ 7.
In light of the nature of relief requested in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, the parties’ stipulation, and

3
4

the Court’s October 7 ruling, the Complaint appears to be moot. Accordingly, the parties are

5

hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be dismissed or, in the alternative,

6

stayed until arbitration concludes. The parties need not confine their arguments to the issue of

7

mootness, but may address any material issue. Plaintiffs shall file a brief of not more than seven

8

pages, exclusive of supportive exhibits, no later than October 23, 2013.3 Defendants may file a

9

brief of not more than five pages, exclusive of exhibits, no later than October 30, 2013. No replies
are permitted and the matter shall be submitted on the papers.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

This Order terminates Docket Nos. 10, 14, 29, and 51.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Date: October 9, 2013

15

_______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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

3

In the alternative, if Plaintiffs determine that dismissal is warranted by law or otherwise
appropriate, they may file a notice of voluntary dismissal and the Order to Show Cause shall be
discharged without further proceedings.
2