Filed: Nov. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 13, 2015
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . This Order describes the scope of the hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which the Court finds necessary to address in light of the parties' recent filings. On September 23, 2015, two counties and two private parties initiated this action. 1 (Dkt. no. 1.) Five days later, on September 28, 2015, these Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Motion"), seeking an expedited hearing. (Dkt. no. 4.) On October 2, 2015, the Cour
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . This Order describes the scope of the hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which the Court finds necessary to address in light of the parties' recent filings. On September 23, 2015, two counties and two private parties initiated this action. 1 (Dkt. no. 1.) Five days later, on September 28, 2015, these Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Motion"), seeking an expedited hearing. (Dkt. no. 4.) On October 2, 2015, the Court..
More
ORDER
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
This Order describes the scope of the hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which the Court finds necessary to address in light of the parties' recent filings.
On September 23, 2015, two counties and two private parties initiated this action.1 (Dkt. no. 1.) Five days later, on September 28, 2015, these Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Motion"), seeking an expedited hearing. (Dkt. no. 4.) On October 2, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff's request and set a hearing on the Motion for November 12, 2015. (Dkt. no. 10.) Pursuant to the parties' stipulations, the Court subsequently extended the briefing schedule on the Motion and continued the hearing to November 17, 2015. (Dkt. nos. 15, 28.) On October 22, 2015, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint adding additional plaintiffs ("Additional Plaintiffs"). (Dkt. no. 20.) The Motion was fully briefed on November 12, 2015. On the same day, the Additional Plaintiffs filed a Joinder to the Motion. (Dkt. no. 33.) Unsurprisingly, the Motion and related briefs do not address the claims of these Additional Plaintiffs, nor how the Additional Plaintiffs can satisfy their burden in seeking preliminary injunctive relief pursuant to the Winter factors.2
Thus, at the November 17, 2015, hearing, the Court declines to hear any argument or testimony offered by the Additional Plaintiffs with respect to their request for a preliminary injunction for the following reasons: the Court is hearing the Motion on an expedited basis at Plaintiffs' request, the parties have had ample notice of the hearing date, the Additional Plaintiffs have had ample time since the filing of the Amended Complaint to join in the request for preliminary injunctive relief and yet waited until the verge of the scheduled hearing to file their Joinder, and the Motion and related reply brief do not sufficiently address the Additional Plaintiffs' burden for seeking injunctive relief to permit the Court to prepare for the hearing, even if Defendants are prepared to address them.3 The hearing will be limited to the issues raised by the four Plaintiffs who filed the Motion.
