Bravado International Group Merchandising Services, Inc. v. Does 1-100 et al

Filing 21

NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR HEARING. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 2/16/16. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL GROUP
MERCHANDISING SERVICES, INC.,

8
9
10

Plaintiff,
v.

NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR
HEARING

JOHN DOES 1-100, et al.,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 16-cv-00524-JSW

Defendants.

Re: Dkt. No. 5

12
13

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE

14

OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS FOR THE HEARING SCHEDULED ON FEBRUARY 19,

15

2016 AT 9:00 A.M.

16

The parties shall not file written responses to this Notice of Questions for hearing.

17

If the parties intend to rely on legal authorities not cited in their briefs, they are ORDERED

18

to notify the Court and opposing counsel of these authorities reasonably in advance of the hearing

19

and to make copies of those authorities available at the hearing. If the parties submit such

20

additional authorities, they are ORDERED to submit the citations to the authorities only, without

21

argument or additional briefing. Cf. N.D. Civil Local Rule 7-3(d). The parties will be given the

22

opportunity at oral argument to explain their reliance on such authority.

23

1.

The date of the February 6, 2016 Metallica concert at AT&T Park has passed.

24

What occurred at that concert and in the surrounding area pursuant to the Court’s February 3, 2016

25

temporary restraining order (“TRO”) and seizure order?

26

a.

What, if anything, was seized pursuant to this Court’s order?

27

b.

How many Defendants were served with the papers in this action? What

28

papers were they served with in person? Has any follow-up service or other communication

1

occ
curred?

2

2.

3
4

Have all De
efendants hav properly b
ve
been served with the Co
d
omplaint and notice of
d

this hearing, or should addi
s
r
itional proce be requir before th Court may proceed wi this case?
ess
red
he
y
ith
?
3.

The Court’s February 3, 2016 order set a deadli of Februa 12, 2016 for written
s
r
ine
ary
6

5

res
sponses to th motion for preliminary injunction. No Defend has filed a written r
he
r
y
.
dant
response. Is

6

Pla
aintiff now aware of the identity of any Defendan Should the Complai be amend to name
a
a
nt?
int
ded

7

the Defendants
e
s?

8

4.

9

s
ure
minated, on i own term six hours
its
ms,
The Court’s February 3, 2016 seizu order term

afte the February 6, 2016 Metallica co
er
oncert at AT&T Park. T Court’s T
The
TRO and Pla
aintiff’s
req
quest for a pr
reliminary in
njunction app to be m
pear
moot now tha the concer is over. Sh
at
rt
hould the

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

TR be dissolv and the request for preliminary i
RO
ved
r
p
injunction be denied as m
moot? If no why not?
ot,

12

5.

What should now be do with rega to any se
d
one
ard
eized propert
ty?

13

6.

What additional relief, if any, does P
i
Plaintiff see in this acti
ek
ion? What,

14
15
16

pro
ocedurally, are the next steps for the Court and th parties?
a
s
he
IT IS SO ORDER
S
RED.
Da
ated: Februar 16, 2016
ry

17
18
JE
EFFREY S. W
WHITE
Un
nited States D
District Judg
ge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2