Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Federal Trade Commission v. Noland, CV-20-00047-PHX-DWL. (2020)

Court: District Court, D. Arizona Number: infdco20200117b68 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 09, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 09, 2020
Summary: SEALED ORDER DOMINIC W. LANZA , District Judge . Upon review of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's ("FTC") motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 7), the Court has determined a hearing on the matter would be beneficial. Specifically, the Court has concerns about whether it can grant a temporary restraining order without notice to the Defendants. The Court recognizes Rule 65(b) authorizes such relief and that the Court has broad authority to "grant any ancillary relief necessary to
More

SEALED ORDER

Upon review of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's ("FTC") motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 7), the Court has determined a hearing on the matter would be beneficial. Specifically, the Court has concerns about whether it can grant a temporary restraining order without notice to the Defendants. The Court recognizes Rule 65(b) authorizes such relief and that the Court has broad authority to "grant any ancillary relief necessary to accomplish complete justice" under 15 U.S.C. § 53(b). FTC v. H. N. Singer, Inc., 668 F.2d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir. 1982). It is unclear, however, how those grants of authority square with § 53(b)'s requirement that a temporary restraining order issue only "after notice to the defendant."

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED setting an ex parte hearing in this matter for January 9, 2020, at 2:30 p.m. Counsel for the FTC may appear in person or telephonically. If Counsel choose to appear telephonically, counsel are directed to call (866) 390-1828; Access Code: . . . 9667260 five minutes prior to the scheduled hearing. Counsel are advised that speaker phones or cell phones are not permitted.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer