Davis et al v. Seva Beauty, LLC et al

Filing 30

MINUTE ORDER RENOTING Plaintiff's 29 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order : Noting Date 7/21/2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 3 4 ANNA A. DAVIS, et al., 5 Plaintiffs, 6 C17-547 TSZ v. 7 MINUTE ORDER SEVA BEAUTY, LLC, et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge: 11 (1) Plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”), docket no. 29, is RENOTED to July 21, 2017, and will be considered at the same time as their motion 12 for preliminary injunction, docket no. 28.1 Defendants shall file a consolidated response 13 to the motions for TRO and preliminary injunction, which shall not exceed thirty (30) pages in length. Any reply shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages in length. The response 14 and any reply shall be due in accordance with Local Civil Rule 7(d)(3). 15 (2) record. 16 The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of Dated this 27th day of June, 2017. William M. McCool Clerk 17 18 s/Karen Dews Deputy Clerk 19 20 1 Plaintiffs have not made the requisite showing for the issuance of a TRO without notice to defendants or an opportunity to be heard. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1). Plaintiffs’ counsel has 21 not submitted the requisite certificate indicating that an effort was made to provide notice to defendants and setting forth reasons why notice to defendants should not be required. Moreover, 22 the arbitrations at issue were commenced in late March and late May 2017, and plaintiffs have not explained why they could not seek or have not sought, from the arbitrator or arbitrators, a 23 continuance or stay of any hearing dates or deadlines. MINUTE ORDER - 1

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?