Perrigo Company et al v. Merial Limited et al

Filing 86

SCHEDULING ORDER - The defendants may respond to the plaintiffs' motion for restraining order 77 on or before 5 p.m. Central Time, February 24, 2015. The plaintiffs may reply in support of their motion on or before 5 p.m. Central Time, Februar y 25, 2015. At this time, no hearing will be scheduled, unless, and until, the Court is advised that additional evidence will be adduced at an in-court hearing or that oral argument would be beneficial to the Court. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (CS)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PERRIGO COMPANY, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8:14-CV-403

vs.
SCHEDULING ORDER
MERIAL LIMITED, doing business as
MERIAL LLC, and MERIAL SAS,
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order and Request for Evidentiary Hearing and Oral Argument
(filing 77). The defendants' initial response to that motion (filing 84) proposes
that a hearing is unnecessary, and that the Court should resolve other
pending motions first, but that if the Court decides to consider the plaintiffs'
motion for a restraining order, the defendants should be permitted to respond
on or before February 24, 2015.
The Court has not yet determined in what order the motions pending
before it should be resolved, so the Court will direct the defendants to
respond to the plaintiffs' motion for restraining order, and will permit the
plaintiffs to reply. The defendants' response may refer to and rely upon the
evidence that has already been filed with the Court.
However, despite the plaintiffs' request for an "evidentiary hearing,"
there is nothing in the plaintiffs' motion or briefing that identifies any
additional evidence that such a hearing would be expected to adduce. The
Court will, therefore, not set a hearing at this time. The plaintiffs should
inform the Court if there is, in fact, any evidence or testimony that can only
be presented at an in-court hearing.
The plaintiffs have presented their motion for a restraining order as a
situation demanding immediate relief. The Court is sensitive to the concerns
of plaintiffs' counsel, and their clients, about the urgency of this matter.
Regardless of whether a hearing is held, the Court will promptly review the
record to make its own determination about whether there is a genuine
threat of irreparable harm, and whether the other criteria for a restraining
order or preliminary injunction are satisfied.

IT IS ORDERED:
1.

The defendants may respond to the plaintiffs' motion for
restraining order on or before 5 p.m. Central Time,
February 24, 2015.

2.

The plaintiffs may reply in support of their motion on or
before 5 p.m. Central Time, February 25, 2015.

3.

At this time, no hearing will be scheduled, unless, and
until, the Court is advised that additional evidence will be
adduced at an in-court hearing or that oral argument would
be beneficial to the Court.

Dated this 18th day of February, 2015.
BY THE COURT:

John M. Gerrard
United States District Judge

-2-