ABS-CBN Corporation et al v. Ashby et al, No. 3:2014cv01275 - Document 24 (D. Or. 2014)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. Signed on 08/15/2014 by Judge Anna J. Brown. (pvh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON ABS-CBN CORPORATION, a Philippine corporation; ABS-CBN FILM PRODUCTIONS, INC. d/b/a Star Cinema, a Philippine corporation; and ABS-CBN INTERNATIONAL, a California corporation, Plaintiffs, v. JEFFREY ASHBY, an individual; LENIE ASHBY, an individual; jointly d/b/a WEBPINOYTAMBA YAN.COM; WATCHFILIPINOTV.COM; WATCHFILIPINOMOVIES.COM; PINOY-TVKO.COM; PINOYTVKO.BIZ; PINOY-TUBE. COM; MYPINOYTUBETV.COM; PINOYTALAGA.COM; PINOYSTREAMING.COM; PINOYMOVIEFAN.COM; PINOYTVEPISODES.NET; PINOYTVEPISODES.INFO; and DOES 1-100, Defendants. 1 - OPINION AND ORDER 3:14-CV-01275-HU OPINION AND ORDER MATTHEW A. LEVIN CHAD M. COLTON Markowitz Herbold Glade & Mehlhaf, PC 1211 S.W. Fifth Avenue Suite 3000 Portland, OR 97204 (503) 295-3085 Attorneys for Plaintiffs BROWN, Judge. On August 15, 2014, the Court held further proceedings on Plaintiffs Ex Parte Application (#3) for Entry of Temporary Restraining Order and Ex Parte Application (#4) for Temporary Order Restraining Transfer of Assets. Although Defendants Jeffrey and Lenie Ashby sent the Court a letter before the hearing, neither of them nor any person or attorney appeared at the hearing on behalf of any defendant. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court CONTINUES the Temporary Restraining Orders (#12, #13) entered August 8, 2014, until further Order of the Court and not any later than September 18, 2014, when, as noted below, the Court will conduct an evidentiary hearing on Plaintiffs outstanding request for a preliminary injunction. Pursuant to its case-management authority under Federal Rule of Evidence 16, the Court grants all parties leave to conduct immediately expedited discovery limited to the issues relevant to Plaintiffs request for a preliminary injunction. 2 - OPINION AND ORDER The Court DIRECTS Plaintiffs to file no later than Noon, September 11, 2014, a Memorandum in Support of their request for a preliminary injunction in this matter concisely setting forth the issues to be determined and the facts and legal standards relevant to resolving such issues. Defendants may, but are not required to, file a written response to Plaintiffs Memorandum no later than Noon, September 16, 2014. As noted, the Court will conduct an evidentiary hearing on Plaintiffs request for preliminary injunction on September 18, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 14A of the United States Courthouse, 1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Portland, Oregon. The Court ADVISES Defendants Jeffrey and Lenie Ashby that they may appear pro se as individuals and represent themselves individually and to the extent that they individually are doing business as any named Defendant-entity. Because Defendants Jeffrey and Lenie Ashby are not attorneys, however, they may not represent corporations or other unincorporated associations in this Court. See, e.g., McGowan v. Boek, 402 F. App x 287, 288 (9th Cir. 2012)( Corporations and other unincorporated associations must appear in court through an attorney. Quoting Licht v. Am. W. Airlines, 40 F.3d 1058, 1059 (9th Cir. 1994)). Any Defendant receiving notice of this Order who fails to appear at the September 18, 2014, evidentiary hearing or who 3 - OPINION AND ORDER otherwise fails to defend against Plaintiffs request for a preliminary injunction risks the Court taking action against them and deciding the merits of the request for a preliminary injunction on the uncontested record. The Court directs Plaintiffs counsel to serve a copy of this Order on Defendants in the same manner as required for service of summons and complaint and to file proof of service of same in the record of this matter before the September 18, 2014, evidentiary hearing. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 15th day of August, 2014. /s/ Anna J. Brown ANNA J. BROWN United States District Judge 4 - OPINION AND ORDER

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.