Burrell Behavioral Health v. DRS Group, 6:19-03251-CV-RK. (2019)
Court: District Court, W.D. Missouri
Number: infdco20190718a72
Visitors: 13
Filed: Jul. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 17, 2019
Summary: ORDER ROSEANN A. KETCHMARK , District Judge . This diversity action involves a contract between Plaintiff Burrell Behavioral Health and Defendant DRS Group for bulk scanning services of Plaintiff's protected health information ("PHI"). Plaintiff alleges, among other things, that Defendant failed to appropriately safeguard the PHI and now refuses to return the PHI until Plaintiff pays its invoices. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order, show cause order and
Summary: ORDER ROSEANN A. KETCHMARK , District Judge . This diversity action involves a contract between Plaintiff Burrell Behavioral Health and Defendant DRS Group for bulk scanning services of Plaintiff's protected health information ("PHI"). Plaintiff alleges, among other things, that Defendant failed to appropriately safeguard the PHI and now refuses to return the PHI until Plaintiff pays its invoices. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order, show cause order and ..
More
ORDER
ROSEANN A. KETCHMARK, District Judge.
This diversity action involves a contract between Plaintiff Burrell Behavioral Health and Defendant DRS Group for bulk scanning services of Plaintiff's protected health information ("PHI"). Plaintiff alleges, among other things, that Defendant failed to appropriately safeguard the PHI and now refuses to return the PHI until Plaintiff pays its invoices.
Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order, show cause order and preliminary injunction (the "Motion"). (Doc. 2.) Plaintiff filed this lawsuit on July 16, 2019, and contemporaneously filed the Motion. Defendant has not been served. Because Plaintiff did not certify in writing the efforts it made to give notice to Defendant, nor did it explain why it should not be required to give such notice, the Court cannot issue a temporary restraining order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(B). Because Defendant has not yet been given notice of the motion, the Court also cannot rule on the motion for a preliminary injunction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion is DENIED. If Plaintiff believes a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction is still necessary, it may file a new motion that complies with Rule 65.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
