Davis v. United States Olympic Committee

Filing 9

ORDER Denying 5 Amended Ex Parte Request for a Temporary Restraining Order. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 7/9/12. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

MAURICE DAVIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE,

14

Defendant.

15
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 12-CV-02999-LHK
ORDER DENYING SECOND EX PARTE
MOTION FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER

On June 11, 2012, Plaintiff Maurice Davis (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against the United

17

States Olympic Committee (“Defendant”), in which he sought an ex parte temporary restraining

18

order (“TRO”) “directing the United States Olympic Committee to let Plaintiff compete in the

19

Paralympic swim trials that will take place from June 14-16, 2012, at Bismarck State College.”

20

ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”) at 8-9. Plaintiff alleged that he suffered discrimination on the basis of race

21

and would be irreparably harmed in the absence of preliminary injunctive relief. On June 12, 2012,

22

the Court denied Plaintiff’s TRO for failure to comply with the procedural requirements governing

23

the filing of an ex parte TRO and for failure to show a likelihood of success on the merits. See

24

ECF No. 4.

25

On July 3, 2012, Plaintiff filed an Amendment to his Complaint, in which he renews his ex

26

parte application for a temporary restraining order. See ECF No. 5. Plaintiff appends four

27

additional pages of factual allegations and argument to a copy of his original Complaint, in further

28

support of his original request for a TRO. However, the additional allegations and argument do not
1
Case No.: 12-CV-02999-LHK
ORDER DENYING SECOND EX PARTE MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

1

show a likelihood of success on the merits for the reasons discussed in the Order denying

2

Plaintiff’s first ex parte request for a TRO. See ECF No. 4 at 2-3.

3

Moreover, Plaintiff requests the same relief as before, i.e., “[f]or an immediate temporary

4

restraining order directing the United States Olympic Committee to let Plaintiff compete in the

5

Paralympic swim trials that will take place from June 14-16, 2012, at Bismarck State College.”

6

ECF No. 5 at 12. The event that Plaintiff seeks to enjoin has already occurred. Because Plaintiff

7

did not file his amended ex parte request for a TRO until July 3, 2012, seventeen days after the

8

Paralympic swim trials allegedly transpired, Plaintiff cannot show that he will be irreparably

9

harmed in the absence of preliminary injunctive relief.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s second request for a TRO is DENIED for failure to show a

11

likelihood of success on the merits and for mootness.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15

Dated: July 9, 2012

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 12-CV-02999-LHK
ORDER DENYING SECOND EX PARTE MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER