UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 5, 2012
GEORKESHIA DENISE CAMPBELL, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
WILLIAM FUJIOKA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dean D. Pregerson United States District Judge
[Dkt. No. 10]
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Presently before the court is Petitioner Georkeshia Denise Campbell's Application for a Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO").
A temporary restraining order is meant to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. To establish entitlement to a TRO, the requesting party must show (1) that she is likely to succeed on the merits, (2) that she is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, (3) that the balance of equities tips in her favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the public interest. Winter v. Natural Res. Defense Counsel, 129 S.Ct. 365, 374 (2008). A TRO may be warranted where a party (1) shows a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable harm, or (2)raises serious questions and the balance of hardships tips in favor of a TRO. See Arcamuzi v. Continental Air Lines, Inc., 819 F.2d 935, 937 (9th Cir. 1987). "These two formulations represent two points on a sliding scale in which the required degree of irreparable harm increases as the probability of success decreases." Id. Under both formulations, however, the party must demonstrate a "fair chance of success on the merits" and a "significant threat of irreparable injury."*fn1 Id.
Furthermore, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b), a court may issue a temporary restraining order without written or oral notice to the adverse party or its attorney only if: (A) specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition; and (B) the movant's attorney certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice and the reasons why it should not be required.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1) (emphasis added).
Petitioner acknowledges that she has not contacted Defendant Jared Haskell, against whom she seeks a TRO. (Application at 2.) Petitioner asserts that Defendant Haskell "has sought to provide fraudulent documentation to induce an eviction process for which he has no authority to impose" and that defendants "have furthermore caused undo (sic) financial hardship upon the Plaintiff Ms. Campbell and her minor children." (Memorandum at 1.) Without more information, however, the court cannot ascertain a threat of immediate injury that would justify the lack of notice to defendants, nor can the court determine that the Winter factors have been met.
Accordingly, Petitioner's Application for a Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED without prejudice.