Rossi Ventures, Inc. et al v. Pasquini et al
Filing
101
ORDER denying 87 Motion to Clarify. Defendants shall immediately comply with the preliminary injuction. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 8/7/12.(dkals, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02838-CMA-BNB
ROSSI VENTURES, INC., and
Y. MELINDA PASQUINI,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ANTONIO PASQUINI,
PASQUINI FRANCHISING, LLC,
PASQUINI=S RESTAURANTS, LLC,
PASQUINI=S CHERRY CREEK, LLC,
PASQUINI=S 17th, LLC, and
PASQUINI=S COLFAX, LLC,
Defendants.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Clarification. (Doc.
# 87.) On June 28, 2012, this Court adopted and affirmed Magistrate Judge Boland’s
Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 56) and thereby granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 14). (Doc. # 78.)
In the instant motion, Defendants seek an additional 90 days to comply with the
injunction. (See Doc. # 87.) However, Plaintiffs argue, and the Court agrees, that
granting such a request would defeat one of the primary purposes of a preliminary
injunction—i.e., to provide expedited relief to a party that would otherwise suffer
imminent harm. (See Doc. # 96.)
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendants Motion for Clarification (Doc. # 87)
be DENIED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants SHALL IMMEDIATELY COMPLY with
the preliminary injunction that has been ordered against them.
DATED: August
07 , 2012
BY THE COURT:
_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge
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?