Opinion
23-cv-04186-JD
12-15-2023
LENORA BROWN, Plaintiff, v. CITI MORTGAGE, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
JAMES DONATO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The Court entered a temporary restraining order against defendant Dyck O'Neal barring sale or foreclosure of plaintiff Lenora Brown's residence, because she “raised a serious question on the merits of Dyck O'Neal's interest in her residence,” and “the balance of hardships tips heavily in her favor.” Dkt. No. 15 (citing Pangea Legal Servs. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 512 F.Supp.3d 966, 972 (N.D. Cal. 2021)). The Court directed Dyck to show cause by December 1, 2023, why a preliminary injunction should not issue. See id. More than 10 days have passed since that deadline, and Dyck has not filed any response or otherwise communicated with the Court.
Dyck has not proffered any facts in response to Brown's showing that she is entitled to injunctive relief for the reasons stated in the TRO. Consequently, Dyck and its agents, assigns, representatives, attorneys, and all others acting in concert with it, are enjoined pending further order from selling, foreclosing, encumbering, or affecting title of Brown's residence, located at 473 Kennwood Dr., Ukiah, CA 95482. Brown is not required to post a bond under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), because the record does not indicate that Dyck is likely to suffer any harm from maintaining the status quo pending a resolution on the merits. See Jorgensen v. Cassiday, 320 F.3d 906, 919 (9th Cir. 2003).
IT IS SO ORDERED.