Monterey Bay Military Housing, LLC et al v. Pinnacle Monterey LLC et al

Filing 108

ORDER RE MOTIONS. 100 Application for TRO is DENIED. 98 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 99 Motion for Extension of time, 101 Motion to Shorten Time are TERMINATED as moot. Defendants' supplemental brief on 36 Motion to Dissolve Preliminary Injunction due by 2/3/2015. Plaintiffs' response due by 2/9/2015. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 1/27/2015. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/27/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 MONTEREY BAY MILITARY HOUSING, LLC, et al., 7 Case No. 14-cv-03953-BLF Plaintiffs, 8 ORDER RE MOTIONS v. 9 [Re: ECF 98, 99, 100, 101] 10 PINNACLE MONTEREY LLC, et al., Defendants. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 On January 21, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction to Preserve 13 14 Right to Specific Performance, ECF 98, followed shortly thereafter by a January 26, 2015 Ex 15 Parte Application for a Temporary Restraining Order on Preliminary Injunction, ECF 100. On 16 January 27, 2015, the Court held a hearing on Defendants’ Application for TRO with all parties in 17 attendance. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court ORDERS as follows: 1. 18 Defendants’ Application for TRO is DENIED because there is no risk of 19 irreparable harm to Defendants at this time in light of the continued effect of the December 26, 20 2012 preliminary injunction issued by the Monterey County Superior Court. 2. 21 The parties are ordered to provide supplemental briefing on Plaintiffs’ Motion to 22 Dissolve the December 26, 2012 preliminary injunction, ECF 36, in order to address the 23 arguments raised in Defendants’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction: a. Defendants’ supplemental brief of no more than seven (7) pages is due on or 24 before February 3, 2015.1 25 26 27 28 1 Because Defendants and Plaintiffs requested one week and 5 days respectively to prepare the supplemental briefing, the deadlines set forth in this order reflect that request and are intended to correct the Court’s misstatements on the record concerning the corresponding calendar dates. b. Plaintiffs’ responsive brief of no more than seven (7) pages is due on or 1 before February 9, 2015. 2 c. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, no further briefing or oral argument will 3 be required. 4 3. 5 Defendants’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF 98, is TERMINATED.2 The 6 arguments raised in Defendants’ motion are subsumed under the issues raised in the parties’ 7 briefing on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dissolve Preliminary Injunction and will be further addressed in 8 the parties’ supplemental briefing. The Court will fully consider all arguments in the parties’ main 9 and supplemental briefs in determining whether to dissolve the December 28, 2012 injunction 10 issued by the Monterey County Superior Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Dated: January 27, 2015 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 28 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Extension of Time to File Response, ECF 99, and Defendants’ Motion to Shorten Time for Hearing, ECF 101, are likewise TERMINATED as moot. 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?