Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): investigation that the company believes to transgress separation-of-powers principles constitutes irreparable harm. See John Doe Co., 849 F.3d at 1135 (rebuffing Future Income Payments’ position that “any alleged separation-of-powers injury is by its very nature irreparable”); John Doe Co., 235 F.Supp.3d at 203-04, 2017 WL 663528, at *6 (same). Similarly, in Tilton v. SEC, a challenge to the constitutionality of the appointment of administrative law judges in the SEC, the Second Circuit held that “being subjected to an unconstitutional administrative process” and enduring the “expense and disruption” of these proceedings do not qualify as irreparable harm. 824 F.3d 276, 286 (2d Cir. 2016); see FTC v. Standard Oil Co. of Cal., 449 U.S. 232, 244, 101 S.Ct. 488, 66 L.Ed.2d 416 (1980) (<HOLDING>). Future Income Payments’ averred injury proves 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the threat of irreparable harm must be immediate (B) holding the time trouble and expense of an unnecessary trial is not irreparable harm when determining whether the threshold elements of certiorari jurisdiction have been met (C) holding that where state rules of civil procedure apply to courts of the state they do not apply to adjudicatory proceedings before state agencies (D) holding that monetary damages do not generally constitute irreparable harm (E) holding that the expense and disruption of defending oneself in protracted adjudicatory proceedings do not amount not irreparable harm
Output (English): holding that where state rules of civil procedure apply to courts of the state they do not apply to adjudicatory proceedings before state agencies