Saeed

Saeed v. City of Fairfield, CA Police Dept.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 18, 20232:23-cv-00087California1,350 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AHMED SAEED, No. 2:23-cv-00087-MCE-DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Ahmed Saeed’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”), which seeks to enjoin Defendants from enforcing two recommendations that Plaintiff’s business license for his store Smoke Shop N’ More (“SNM”) be revoked, and to reinstate said business license following a Notice of Revocation issued on September 9, 2022. See ECF No. 8 (“Pl.’s Mot.”). For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion is DENIED. The purpose of a temporary restraining order is to preserve the status quo pending the complete briefing and thorough consideration contemplated by full proceedings pursuant to a preliminary injunction. See Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers Local No. 70 of Alameda Cnty., 415 U.S. 423, 438–39 (1974) (temporary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.