Authenticom, Inc. v. CDK Global, LLC et al

Filing 81

ORDER regarding schedule for plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction: defendants' opposition is due June 16; plaintiff may file a reply by June 22; evidentiary hearing will be June 26-27. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 05/22/2017. (ejt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

AUTHENTICOM, INC.,
Plaintiff,

v.

CDK GLOBAL, LLC, and
THE REYNOLDS AND REYNOLDS COMPANY,

ORDER
17-cv-318-jdp

Defendants.
Plaintiff has moved for a preliminary injunction, Dkt. 51, which it has amply
supported with a brief, proposed findings, and numerous declarations and exhibits,
Dkts. 52-72. Plaintiff also seeks expedited briefing and a prompt hearing, which defendants
have, unsurprisingly, opposed. Dkt. 74 and Dkt. 77.
I have some sympathy for defendants because plaintiff’s filing is huge, even though it
complies with the court’s rules. But defendants don’t propose any alternative, other than to
summarily dismiss the requested injunction or combine it with a trial on the merits. That of
course would require me to just ignore the imminent harm that plaintiff alleges, so those
options are out. Today plaintiff asks for a status conference to set a schedule. A conference is
unnecessary; I have heard fully from the parties about the timing and the difficulties they
face.
Here’s your schedule:
Defendants’ opposition is due June 16;
Plaintiff may file a reply by June 22;

Evidentiary hearing: June 26-27.
Entered May 22, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

2