Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL v. BERGER LAW GROUP, P.A., 8:14-cv-01825-T-30MAP. (2014)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20140916b54 Visitors: 2
Filed: Aug. 26, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 26, 2014
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARK A. PIZZO, Magistrate Judge. Before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for ex parte temporary restraining order with asset freeze and other equitable relief and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (doc. 6). On August 1, 2014, the district judge issued a temporary restraining order in this matter and referred the motion for preliminary injunction to me for a report and recommendation. I held a status hearing on August 8, 2014, at which t
More

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

MARK A. PIZZO, Magistrate Judge.

Before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for ex parte temporary restraining order with asset freeze and other equitable relief and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (doc. 6). On August 1, 2014, the district judge issued a temporary restraining order in this matter and referred the motion for preliminary injunction to me for a report and recommendation. I held a status hearing on August 8, 2014, at which time I advised Defendants Litigation Law, LLC, the Resolution Law Group, P.C., and the Resolution Law Center, LLC, who were unrepresented at the hearing, to obtain counsel and respond to Plaintiffs' motion by August 12, 2014. They failed to respond. Therefore, under Local Rule 3.01(b), the Court presumes the Defendants Litigation Law, LLC, the Resolution Law Group, P.C., and the Resolution Law Center, LLC have no objection to the motion.1 Accordingly for the reasons stated in Plaintiffs' motion, it is hereby

RECOMMENDED:

1. That a preliminary injunction be entered against Defendants Litigation Law, LLC, the Resolution Law Group, P.C., and the Resolution Law Center, LLC as proposed by Plaintiffs in their motion for ex parte temporary restraining order with asset freeze and other equitable relief and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (doc. 6).

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.

FootNotes


1. The remaining Defendants entered into a stipulated preliminary injunction (doc. 40), which was granted by the district judge on August 22, 2014 (doc. 42).
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