Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-03481/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-03481-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NACIO SYSTEMS, INC.,

Plaintiff, No. C 07-3481 PJH

v. ORDER EXTENDING TERM OF JULY 

18, 2007, TEMPORARY RESTRAINING 

HERBERT GOTTLIEB, et al., ORDER; DENYING SECOND REQUEST

FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING 

Defendants. ORDER; AND DENYING REQUEST FOR

_______________________________/ OSC RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

The application of plaintiff Nacio Systems, Inc. (“Nacio”) for a temporary restraining

order and an order to show cause re preliminary injunction came on for hearing before this

court on August 1, 2007. Nacio appeared by its counsel Frank Sommers, and defendants

Herbert Gottlieb (“Gottlieb”) and SWIdent, LLC (“SWIdent”) appeared by their counsel Mark

J. Rice. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the

relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby orders as follows for

the reasons stated at the hearing.

The standards for a temporary restraining order and for a preliminary injunction are

substantially the same. Stuhlbarg Int’l Sales Co., Inc. v. John D. Brush & Co., Inc., 240

F.3d 832, 839 n. 7 (9th Cir. 2001). In general, to prevail on a motion for preliminary

injunction, plaintiff must show (1) a strong likelihood of success on the merits, (2) the

possibility of irreparable injury to plaintiff if preliminary relief is not granted, (3) a balance of

hardships favoring the plaintiff, and (4) advancement of the public interest (in certain

cases). See Rodde v. Bonta, 357 F.3d 988, 994 (9th Cir. 2004). Alternatively, injunctive

relief can be granted if the plaintiff merely "demonstrate[s] . . . a combination of probable

success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury." Id.

However, in copyright actions, the requirement that the moving party establish the

Case 4:07-cv-03481-PJH Document 26 Filed 08/01/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

possibility of irreparable harm has been essentially eliminated. In general, in copyright

actions, a showing of a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits “raises a

presumption of irreparable harm.” Triad Sys. Corp. v. Southeastern Express Co., 64 F.3d

1330, 1335 (9th Cir. 1995). A party showing a reasonable likelihood of success on the

merits of a copyright infringement claim is thus normally entitled to a preliminary injunction.

Optinrealbig.com, LLC v. Ironport Sys., 323 F.Supp. 2d 1037, 1050 (N.D. Cal. 2004). 

The temporary restraining order issued on July 18, 2007, is hereby extended for ten

(court) days, until August 15, 2007. In addition, in order to preclude the inadvertent

destruction of data from defendants’ computer or data storage systems, defendants shall –

as soon as possible, but in any event no later than August 15, 2007 – arrange for their

computer forensics expert to make a “mirror image” of the hard drives on all business

systems used by SWIdent, and on the desktop computer removed from Nacio by Gottlieb

when he left his employment at that company. 

Nacio’s second application for temporary restraining order is DENIED, as Nacio has

not established a likelihood of success on the merits. The request for an order to show

cause re preliminary injunction is DENIED without prejudice to re-filing, as noted below.

Following the “mirror image” copying of the hard drives and the August 15, 2007,

expiration of the temporary restraining order, the parties shall meet and confer in an effort

to resolve their dispute. No later than September 14, 2007, the parties shall advise the

court in writing of the status of the case; whether Nacio wishes to proceed with a motion for

preliminary injunction; and whether the parties wish to engage in limited pre-motion

discovery. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 1, 2007 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:07-cv-03481-PJH Document 26 Filed 08/01/07 Page 2 of 2