Le v. Huynh

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied Dien Le’s ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order against Trinh Ngoc Huynh and Huynh Dining. The court held that plaintiff failed to provide the certification required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B) and did not establish the requirements for injunctive relief, including likelihood of success and irreparable harm. The court stated that plaintiff could seek a preliminary injunction after providing defendants notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Holdings

1. An ex parte temporary restraining order cannot issue when the movant fails to provide the written certification required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B). Plaintiff’s failure to file that certification was independently fatal to the motion.
2. Plaintiff was not entitled to a temporary restraining order because plaintiff failed to establish the required elements, including a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, and a public-interest basis for relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B) by certifying in writing the efforts made to provide notice and the reasons notice should not be required.
2. Whether plaintiff established the elements required for a temporary restraining order, including likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, favorable balancing of equities, and consistency with the public interest.

Disposition

denied