Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Roberts v. Sinclair, C18-837 RSM-BAT. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20180618b43 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 15, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 15, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISSOLVE EX PARTE ORDER RICARDO S. MARTINEZ , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Stephen Sinclair's Motion to Dissolve Ex Parte Order Granting Temporary Restraining Order. Dkt. #15. Although Defendant presents substantial evidence and argument, he seeks no relief other than to lift and/or dissolve the Court's Temporary Restraining Order issued on Sunday, June 12, 2018. See Dkt. #15-1. On June 15, 2018, the Cou
More

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISSOLVE EX PARTE ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Stephen Sinclair's Motion to Dissolve Ex Parte Order Granting Temporary Restraining Order. Dkt. #15. Although Defendant presents substantial evidence and argument, he seeks no relief other than to lift and/or dissolve the Court's Temporary Restraining Order issued on Sunday, June 12, 2018. See Dkt. #15-1. On June 15, 2018, the Court conducted a telephonic hearing on this matter and heard from the parties on the issues raised in this Motion.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) governs the issuance of Temporary Restraining Orders ("TRO"s). This rule states that "[e]very temporary restraining order issued without notice expires at the time after entry—not to exceed 14 days—that the court sets [unless extended by the Court.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2). The Court has reviewed the TRO in this case, issued by the Honorable Ronald R Leighton, and finds that it was set to expire at the end of Ramadan or on June 15, 2018. The Court therefore concludes that the TRO in this case has already expired. Furthermore, the relief requested by the Plaintiffs in their TRO is no longer necessary. The Court does not anticipate a need to set a preliminary injunction hearing.

Because the TRO has expired, the Court finds that Defendants' Motion is moot.

Having reviewed the relevant briefing and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Defendant Sinclair's Motion to Dissolve Ex Parte Order Granting Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. #15) is DENIED AS MOOT.

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