Opinion
Civil No. 2016-61
09-09-2016
WILNICK DORVAL, Plaintiff, v. MOE'S FRESH MARKET, WALLIE HAMED Defendants.
APPEARANCES: Wilnick Dorval St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. Pro se plaintiff, Wilfredo A. Geigel Law Offices of Wilfredo Giegel St. Croix, U.S.V.I. For Moe's Fresh Market and Wallie Hamed.
APPEARANCES:
Wilnick Dorval
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I.
Pro se plaintiff, Wilfredo A. Geigel
Law Offices of Wilfredo Giegel
St. Croix, U.S.V.I.
For Moe's Fresh Market and Wallie Hamed. ORDER GÓMEZ, J.
Before the Court is the request of the plaintiff, Wilnick Dorval, for a temporary restraining order.
A temporary restraining order may be issued without notice to an adverse party or her attorney only if the petitioner avers to specific facts in a verified complaint or affidavit "that clearly shows that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition." Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(A). Additionally, the petitioner must show: (1) a reasonable probability of success on the merits; (2) irreparable injury will occur to the movant if relief is not granted; (3) less harm will result to the non-movant if the relief is granted than to the movant if the relief is not granted; and (4) the public interest, if any, weighs in favor of the movant. Gerardi v. Pelullo, 16 F.3d 1363, 1373 (3d Cir. 1994) (describing factors for issuing preliminary injunction); see also Bieros v. Nicola, 857 F. Supp. 455, 456 (E.D. Pa. 1994) (noting that the standards for issuing a temporary restraining order are identical to those for the issuance of a preliminary injunction).
The premises considered; it is hereby
ORDERED that the motion for a temporary restraining order is DENIED.
S\_________
Curtis V. Gómez
District Judge