Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-01436/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-01436-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LE VAN HUNG, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LIBBY SCHAAF, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-01436-CRB 

ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY 

RESTRAINING ORDER

Plaintiffs are residents of Oakland who are currently experiencing homelessness. 

Complaint (Dkt. 1). They currently reside in an encampment in the Union Point Park; 

Eastern/Southern parking lot in Oakland, California. Id. at 4; Mot. for a PI (Dkt. 17) at 3.

The City of Oakland’s Public Works Department has informed them, via a notice posted 

on March 15, 2019, that on Wednesday, March 20, 2019, it will “close this encampment. 

Any property left at this site at the time of cleanup it [sic] will be removed from the site 

and stored by public works. Property that is unsafe or hazardous will be immediately 

discarded.” Mot. for a TRO Exh A. (Dkt. 3). Plaintiffs seek a temporary restraining order

(“TRO”), id., and a preliminary injunction, Mot. for a PI, to prevent that closure.

A TRO is an “extraordinary remedy” that should be awarded only upon a clear 

showing that the party is entitled to such relief. See Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 

Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Such an order may be issued only where the moving party has 

established: (1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) a likelihood of irreparable harm 

to plaintiff in the absence of preliminary relief; (3) the balance of equities tips in plaintiff’s 

favor; and (4) that an injunction is in the public interest. See id. at 22. A Court may issue a 

temporary restraining order without written or oral notice only if (A) specific facts in an 

Case 3:19-cv-01436-CRB Document 18 Filed 03/19/19 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, 

or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition; 

and (B) the movant’s attorney certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice and the 

reasons it should not be required. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1).

Plaintiffs allege that their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights will be 

irreparably violated without a TRO because Defendants will seize and destroy their 

property. Complaint at 4; see also Lavan v. City of Los Angeles, 693 F.3d 1022, 1024 (9th 

Cir. 2012). They also allege that their Eighth Amendment rights will be violated because 

they will be subject to arrest. Mot. for a PI at 3; see also Martin v. City of Boise, 902 F.3d 

1031, 1035 (9th Cir. 2018). Plaintiffs do not explain why, although the Notice to Vacate 

was posted on March 15, 2019, they waited until the evening of March 19, 2019—the day 

before the eviction—to file this case. 

In any event, Plaintiffs have demonstrated they face immediate and irreparable 

injury in the form of a loss of their homes and possession and the possibility of criminal 

sanction, before the Court has had the opportunity to hear from Defendants in this matter.

Further, as the Plaintiffs are pro se, it is unclear whether Rule 65(b)(1)(B)’s requirements, 

which impose a duty on “the movant’s attorney,” apply here. Given the imminent nature of 

the challenged action and resulting irreparable harm shown, the Court finds that the 

requirements of Rule 65(b)(1) are met.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining 

order enjoining Defendants from vacating the encampment at the Union Point Park; 

Eastern/Southern parking lot, see Mot. for a TRO at 3, for 14 days, until April 2, 2019.

This order is entered at 6:15 on March 19, 2019.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to serve this Order on the Plaintiffs by email at

maowunyo@gmail.com, jessica.huffman@gmail.com, hawaiianstyle83.NB@gmail.com, 

and tanknytson12@gmail.com. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to serve this Order, the 

Complaint (Dkt. 1), and the Motions for a Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. 3) and 

Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. 17) on Defendants Libby Schaaf at LSchaaf@oaklandnet.com 

Case 3:19-cv-01436-CRB Document 18 Filed 03/19/19 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:19-cv-01436-CRB Document 18 Filed 03/19/19 Page 3 of 3