Cole v. Chase Home Finance LLC et al

Filing 8

ORDER ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER 4 . By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 6/6/12.(mjgsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01452-REB
ANDREW COLE,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC, and
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the plaintiff’s Opposed Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order [#4]1 filed June 4, 2012. The plaintiff seeks a temporary restraining
order preventing the defendants from proceeding with a foreclosure sale scheduled for
today, June 6, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. Late in the day yesterday, June 5, 2012, the plaintiff
filed a notice [#6] in which the plaintiff indicates that the defendants have voluntarily
continued the foreclosure sale. The sale now is rescheduled for July 11, 2012.
The motion for temporary restraining order [#4] concerns circumstances leading
up to the foreclosure sale previously scheduled for June 6, 2012. Now that the June 6,
2012, foreclosure sale has been continued to a later date, the circumstances
surrounding any future foreclosure sale involving the plaintiff necessarily will be

1

“[#4]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

different. Given these circumstances, I deny the current motion for temporary
restraining order [#4] without prejudice. Should circumstances develop which merit the
issuance of a temporary restraining order, the plaintiff may file a new motion for
temporary restraining order.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff’s Opposed Motion for a
Temporary Restraining Order [#4] filed June 4, 2012, is DENIED without prejudice.
Dated June 6, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2