Cessna Employees Credit Union et al v. Lorimac Inc. - Document 34

Cessna Employees Credit Union et al v. Lorimac Inc. Doc. 34 Case 3:07-cv-00120-JSW Document 34 Filed 01/23/2007 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 Plaintiffs, CESSNA EMPLOYEES CREDIT UNION, et al., No. C 07-00120 JSW v. 12 LORIMAC, INC., For the Northern District of California IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT United States District Court 11 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME AND SETTING HEARING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY RECEIVER 13 Defendant. / 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Now before the Court is the parties' stipulation to have Plaintiffs' motion for appointment of a temporary receiver heard on shortened time. In denying Plaintiff's ex parte application for a temporary restraining and request for an appointment of a receiver, the Court found that Plaintiffs failed to make an adequate showing, supported by admissible evidence, of immediate irreparable harm or to provide an explanation as to why they suddenly need immediate relief. Neither Plaintiffs' motion for appointment of a temporary receiver nor the parties' stipulation make any further showing on these issues. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the request to have the motion heard on shortened time. Despite Plaintiffs' failure to select a hearing date in their notice of motion, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiffs' motion for appointment of a temporary receiver will be heard on March 23, 2007 at 9:00 a.m., the first available hearing date on the Court's calendar. The Court notes that Plaintiffs' notice of motion violates Civil Local Rule 7-2 and this Court's Standing Order. Plaintiffs are advised that any further violations of the Local Rules or this Court's Dockets.Justia.com  Case 3:07-cv-00120-JSW Document 34 Filed 01/23/2007 Page 2 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Standing Orders will be sanctioned. The Court FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant's opposi ti on brief to the motion for appointment of a temporary receiver shall be due by Tuesday, February 6, 2007 and Plaintiffs' reply brief shall be due by Tuesday, February 13, 2007. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 23, 2007 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE United States District Court 11 12 For the Northern District of California 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2