Abet Justice L.L.C. et al v. First America Trustee Servicing Solutions, L.L.C. et al

Filing 22

ORDER denying as moot 21 Motion for TRO. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 8/19/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DKJ)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 *** 7 8 ABET JUSTICE LLC and GUETATCHEW FIKROU, ORDER Plaintiff(s), 9 v. 10 11 Case No. 2:14-CV-908 JCM (GWF) FIRST AMERICA TRUSTEE SERVICING SOLUTIONS, LLC, et al., 12 Defendant(s). 13 Presently before the court is a motion for temporary restraining order filed by plaintiffs 14 15 ABET Justice LLC and Guetatchew Fikrou (hereinafter “plaintiffs”). (Doc. # 21). 16 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, a court may issue a temporary restraining 17 order when the moving party provides specific facts showing that immediate and irreparable 18 injury, loss, or damage will result before the adverse party’s opposition to a motion for 19 preliminary injunction can be heard. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65. 20 “The purpose of a temporary restraining order is to preserve the status quo before a 21 preliminary injunction hearing may be held; its provisional remedial nature is designed merely to 22 prevent irreparable loss of rights prior to judgment.” Estes v. Gaston, no. 2:12-cv-1853-JCM- 23 VCF, 2012 WL 5839490, at *2 (D. Nev. Nov. 16, 2012) (citing Sierra On-Line, Inc. v. Phoenix 24 Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1984)). “Thus, in seeking a temporary restraining 25 order, the movant must demonstrate that the denial of relief will expose him to some significant 26 risk of irreparable injury.” Id. (quoting Associated Gen. Contractors of Cal. v. Coal. of Econ. 27 Equity, 950 F.2d 1401, 1410 (9th Cir. 1991)). 28 ... James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge 1 The Supreme Court has stated that courts must consider the following elements in 2 determining whether to issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction: (1) a 3 likelihood of success on the merits; (2) likelihood of irreparable injury if preliminary relief is not 4 granted; (3) balance of hardships; and (4) advancement of the public interest. 5 N.R.D.C., 129 S. Ct. 365, 374–76 (2008). The test is conjunctive, meaning the party seeking the 6 injunction must satisfy each element. Winter v. 7 Plaintiffs seek a temporary restraining order to prevent defendants from conducting the 8 trustee’s sale on September 3, 2014, and from evicting plaintiffs from the subject property. 9 (Doc. # 21). Plaintiffs filed their motion on August 18, 2014. (Doc. # 21). Pursuant to Federal 10 Rule of Civil Procedure 65, a temporary restraining order may only be issued for a maximum of 11 14 days. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2) (“[t]he order expires at the time after entry—not to exceed 14 12 days . . . .”). Therefore, the temporary restraining order that plaintiffs seek would expire before 13 the proposed date of sale. For that reason, the motion for a temporary restraining order will be 14 denied as moot. 15 Accordingly, 16 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion for a 17 18 19 20 temporary restraining order (doc. # 21) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED as moot. DATED August 19, 2014. __________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. 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?