Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00362/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00362-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 120
Nature of Suit: Marine Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 46:741 Shipping

---

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE MOTION

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

ONE SANSOME STREET, SUITE 1400 SAN FRTEANLECISPCHOO,N CEA (LI 415FO) 36 RN2-IA258 94104 0

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

4839-1776-5121.1 -1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

LT. RICHARD T. GENGLER and LT. DANIEL

S. McSEVENEY,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THROUGH

ITS DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND

NAVY, and DOES 1-100, inclusive,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00362 OWW (LJO)

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE

MOTION FOR ENTRY OF TEMPORARY

RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO

SHOW CAUSE RE ENTRY OF

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; AND

ORDER RE PETITION FOR HABEAS

CORPUS

Date: August 4, 2006

Time: 10:00 a.m.

Ctrm: 3

Action Filed: March 31, 2006

This matter being fully heard and argued, this Court ORDERS as follows:

WHEREFORE this Court finds that there is no clear showing under the law that the

contract, even if mistaken, and having a seven-year term, takes precedence over the law requiring

an eight-year term of service by a fixed wing jet aircraft pilot pending the receipt of further

evidence and;

WHEREFORE at this stage, there simply has not been a sufficient showing of likelihood of

success on the merits as there are too many disputed evidentiary issues as have been discussed and

Case 1:06-cv-00362-OWW Document 37 Filed 08/11/06 Page 1 of 2
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE MOTION

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

ONE SANSOME STREET, SUITE 1400 SAN FRTEANLECISPCHOO,N CEA (LI 415FO) 36 RN2-IA258 94104 0

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

4839-1776-5121.1 -2-

debated between the parties on respective sides of this case at the hearing of the ex parte

application for TRO.

 It is ORDERED that;

Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order to order the immediate discharge of

the plaintiffs is DENIED; and 

 FURTHER ORDEREDffs’ request for temporary injunctive relief to require the Navy not to

change the deployment status of the Plaintiffs is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and it is

further ORDERED that;

Defendants shall be required to give at least 20 days’ notice of any intent to change

Plaintiffs’ current non-deployment status so they can make application for appropriate relief to the

Court should that occur, and it is further ORDERED that

The request for an early setting of the case is GRANTED and on the 9th of August, at the

regularly set scheduling conference date, the expedited trial and discovery dates shall be set.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 10, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00362-OWW Document 37 Filed 08/11/06 Page 2 of 2