Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-05847/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-05847-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Copyright Infringement

---

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 Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TOMCOH COMMERCE INC., 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

TREETI, INC., ET AL., 

Defendants.

CASE NO. 18-cv-05847-YGR 

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

INJUNCTION AND RELATED MOTIONS;

ORDER SETTING COMPLIANCE HEARING

Re: Dkt. Nos. 8, 35 

On November 14, 2018, the Court heard argument with respect to (i) Tomcoh Commerce 

Inc.’s (“Momentum”) motion for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 8), and (ii) defendants Treeti, 

Inc.’s (“Treeti”), and Amorette Jones’, Brandi Becker-Jones’, and Thomas Lakeman’s (together, 

the “Individual Defendants”) motion to dismiss Momentum’s complaint or, in the alternative, 

dismiss the Individual Defendants and compel arbitration (Dkt. No. 35). At the hearing, the Court 

focused on the sole viable basis for Momentum’s motion, namely that regarding defendants’ 

alleged possession and/or use of Momentum’s Confidential and Proprietary Information (together, 

“Momentum’s Materials”), as those terms are defined in the Professional Services Agreement 

(“PSA”) and the Mutual Confidentiality Agreement.1

 In light of the oral argument, the Court 

ordered defendants to file supplemental declarations regarding the current state of destruction 

 1

 The “extraordinary and drastic remedy” of preliminary injunctive relief is never awarded 

as of right, Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 689–90 (2008) (internal quotation marks and citations 

omitted), and “[a] plaintiff is not entitled to an injunction if monetary damages would fairly 

compensate him for any wrong he may have suffered.” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 595 (1952); see also Colo. River Indian Tribes v. Town of Parker, 776 F.2d 846, 

851 (9th Cir. 1985) (“[P]urely monetary injury is compensable, and thus not irreparable.”). 

Putting aside the improper possession and/or use of Momentum’s Materials, the essence of 

Momentum’s complaint is for failure to pay on a contract, i.e., a garden-variety business dispute 

not warranting injunctive relief. On all bases not otherwise discussed herein, Momentum’s motion 

for preliminary injunction is thus DENIED. 

Case 4:18-cv-05847-YGR Document 48 Filed 11/20/18 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 Californi

a

and/or return of all of Momentum’s Materials (Dkt. No. 41), which were filed on November 19, 

2018 (Dkt. Nos. 43–46.) 

Having carefully reviewed the sworn statements made therein, and in light of defense 

counsel’s representations made at oral argument, the Court hereby DENIES AS MOOT the sole 

viable basis of Momentum’s motion for preliminary injunction.2 Such denial is WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE to refiling, should Momentum become aware that the state of destruction and/or return 

of Momentum’s Materials is inconsistent with the declarations submitted by defendants. 

With respect to the remaining issues, Momentum and Treeti are ORDERED, pursuant to 

paragraph 8.2 of the PSA, to proceed before JAMS to arbitrate the instant dispute. As for the 

Individual Defendants, the action is STAYED. Defendants’ motion to dismiss Momentum’s 

complaint as it pertains to the Individual Defendants is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling, 

should the arbitration not resolve the dispute in its entirety. 

In addition, the Court SETS a compliance hearing regarding the status of the arbitration for 

Friday, March 29, 2019 on the Court’s 9:01 a.m. calendar. Five (5) business days prior to the 

day of the hearing, the parties shall file a Joint Statement, not to exceed three (3) pages, setting 

forth the status of the arbitration. 

 2

 Momentum’s motion requests that the Court enter the following order: 

[T]hat Treeti and all of its officers, employees, and agents, including but not 

limited to, Defendants Jones, Becker-Jones, and Lakeman, are hereby 

preliminary restrained and enjoined from, directly or indirectly, using or 

disclosing any of Momentum’s Confidential Materials in any way, including 

any of Momentum’s “Confidential Information” and “Proprietary 

Information” as those terms are defined in the Agreements, and any of 

Momentum’s trade secrets, including but not limited to technical designs, 

personas, ideation maps, empathy maps, Bohemian Coding Sketch source 

files, website information architecture, site maps, wireframe designs, visual 

designs, style guides, workshop methodologies, interaction models, system 

organization processes, user interface guidelines, or any derivative works 

therefrom. This preliminary injunction shall remain in place until the 

arbitration has concluded, and judgment has been entered on the arbitration 

award. 

(Dkt. No. 12 at 4–5.) 

Case 4:18-cv-05847-YGR Document 48 Filed 11/20/18 Page 2 of 3
3 

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 Californi

a

If compliance is complete, the parties need not appear, and the compliance hearing will be 

taken off calendar. 

This Order terminates Docket Numbers 8 and 35. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 20, 2018 

 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:18-cv-05847-YGR Document 48 Filed 11/20/18 Page 3 of 3