Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lorenz v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.

United States District Court, D. Oregon

May 4, 2015

CINDY KAY LORENZ and DAVID BRYAN LORENZ, Plaintiffs,
v.
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee for MORGAN STANLEY ABS CAPITAL INC. TRUST 2006-HE4, et al., Defendants.

MICHAEL H. SIMON, District Judge.

The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal for Relief from Stay Regarding Bankruptcy Appeal (Dkt. 15), Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 17), Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. 20), Defendant Deutsche Bank's Objection to Plaintiff's Motion for TRO (Dkt. 21), and the Declaration of Robert E. Maloney in Support of Deutsche Bank's Objection (Dkt. 22). The Court construes Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal for Relief from Stay Regarding Bankruptcy Appeal as seeking, in essence, the same relief that is sought in Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, and the Court will consider them together.

In addition, in Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Plaintiffs ask the Court to consider their request in light of the putative class action lawsuit in the case of Paulson v. Fairway America Corp., et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-1544-CL (D. Or.), which is currently on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Court has done so. Specifically, the Court has read U.S. District Judge Panner's Order dated February 11, 2015, adopting the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Clarke and dismissing Mr. Paulson's lawsuit with prejudice. The Court notes that the Ninth Circuit has not yet issued its decision in that appeal.

Concerning Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, in order to show that a plaintiff is entitled to a temporary restraining order or other preliminary injunctive relief, a plaintiff must show, among other things, either that he or she is likely to succeed on the merits, Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 22 (2008), or, alternatively, that there are serious questions going to the merits. Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1131-32 (9th Cir. 2011). Based on the record herein, Plaintiffs have failed to make either showing.

Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. 20) is DENIED. To the extent that Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal for Relief from Stay Regarding Bankruptcy Appeal (Dkt. 15) is properly considered to be a motion for immediate relief, it is DENIED for the same reasons.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.