Villafranca v. Department of Homeland Security et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|October 14, 2005
ORDER SETTING HEARING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. The Court will conduct a hearing on plaintiff's application October 19, 2005, at 10:00 a.m. If any party wishes to file any additional evidence and/or briefing, such additional documents shall be filed no later than October 17, 2005, at 4:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on October 14, 2005. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF)
|October 13, 2005
ORDER by Judge Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker denying 4 Motion for TRO The court has reviewed the complaint and application for a temporary restraining order ("TRO"), both filed by plaintiff on October 7, 2005. The claims asserted appear to be highly similar if not identical to those in C-05-3783 MMC. On September 28, 2005, Judge Chesney rejected a similar application for a TRO in that case. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12(c), the clerk is directed to refer this matter to Judge Che sney to see if these cases should be related, and if so, to consider steps appropriate in light of what appears to be a duplicative filing.If Judge Chesney does not relate this case by October 27, 2005, Rebecca M Biernat shall appear before the under signed at 10:30 AM on November 1, 2005, then and there to show cause why the court should not impose sanctions under its inherent power. See Hernandez v City of El Monte, 138 F3d 393, 398 (9th Cir 1998). (vrwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/13/2005) Modified on 10/14/2005 (cgd, COURT STAFF).
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?