McCarty v. Roos et al

Filing 55

ORDER Denying 48 Second Motion for Immediate Injunctive Relief. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 5/21/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8

ROBERT JOSEPH MCCARTY,

9
10
11

2:11-CV-1538 JCM (RJJ)

Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN V. ROOS, et al.,

12
13

Defendants.

14
15
16

ORDER
Presently before the court is pro se plaintiff Robert Joseph McCarty’s second motion for
immediate injunctive relief. (Doc. #48).

17

On April 17, 2012, this court entered an order denying plaintiff’s first motion for immediate

18

injunctive relief. (Doc. #41). The court found that the first motion did not clearly articulate the

19

relief plaintiff sought because it simply referred to the “injunctive relief requested in the partial

20

summary judgment motion . . . .” (Doc. #41). The court further found that plaintiff had failed to

21

present the court with specific facts showing that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage

22

would result before the adverse party could be heard. (Doc. #41).

23

The instant motion for immediate injunctive relief is similarly defective. Plaintiff still does

24

not clearly articulate his requested relief, but rather refers the court to “page 15 of the amended

25

complaint.” (Doc. #48). Further, plaintiff has not provided the court with specific facts showing that

26

immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result before the adverse parties can be heard

27

in opposition. FED. R. CIV. P. 65.

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

Accordingly,

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that pro se plaintiff Robert

3

Joseph McCarty’s second motion for immediate injunctive relief (doc. #48) be, and the same hereby

4

is, DENIED.

5

DATED May 21, 2012.

6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-