Filed: Mar. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 19, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM LEONARD P. STARK , District Judge . I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Stanley W. Wills, Jr. ("Plaintiff"), who resides in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, proceeds pro se and has paid the filing fee. Before the Court are Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I 24) and Plaintiffs motion for injunctive relief (D.I. 26.) II. MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME The Court will grant Plaintiff's unopposed motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I. 24)
Summary: MEMORANDUM LEONARD P. STARK , District Judge . I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Stanley W. Wills, Jr. ("Plaintiff"), who resides in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, proceeds pro se and has paid the filing fee. Before the Court are Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I 24) and Plaintiffs motion for injunctive relief (D.I. 26.) II. MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME The Court will grant Plaintiff's unopposed motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I. 24) ..
More
MEMORANDUM
LEONARD P. STARK, District Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Stanley W. Wills, Jr. ("Plaintiff"), who resides in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, proceeds pro se and has paid the filing fee. Before the Court are Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I 24) and Plaintiffs motion for injunctive relief (D.I. 26.)
II. MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME
The Court will grant Plaintiff's unopposed motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I. 24) Plaintiff will be given an additional 30 days to amend his complaint.
III. MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
A. Legal Standards
A preliminary injunction is "an extraordinary remedy that should be granted only if: (1) the plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) denial will result in irreparable harm to the plaintiff; (3) granting the injunction will not result in irreparable harm to the defendant; and (4) granting the injunction is in the public interest." NutraSweet Co. v. Vit-Mar Enterprises, Inc., 176 F.3d 151, 153 (3d Cir. 1999). "[F]ailure to establish any element in [a plaintiff's] favor renders a preliminary injunction inappropriate." Id.
B. Discussion
Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to bring an immediate end to any and all red-light camera programs and practices in the City of Wilmington, Delaware, and the State of Delaware; to classify photographic camera citations as civil matters; and for a total refund to any person or motorist cited and/or who paid fines or court fees under the current red light program. (D.I. 26) Plaintiff also seeks attorneys' fees. Defendant City of Wilmington, Delaware, opposes the motion.
Other than the blanket requests, Plaintiff provides nothing to support his motion. Plaintiff has neither demonstrated the likelihood of success on the merits nor irreparable harm to justify the issuance of immediate injunctive relief. Therefore, the motion will be denied.
IV. CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the Court will grant the motion for an extension of time to amend the complaint (D.I. 24) and deny the motion for injunctive relief (D.I. 26).
An appropriate Order follows.
