Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_20-cv-00893/USCOURTS-azd-2_20-cv-00893-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:405 Fair Housing 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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Arizona Recovery Housing Association,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Arizona Department of Health Services, et 

al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-20-00893-PHX-JAT

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for TRO. (Doc. 11). The Court 

ordered Plaintiff to supplement the motion to explain exactly when adverse action would 

be taken against Plaintiff. (Doc. 12). Plaintiff timely supplemented and indicated it seeks 

to have the TRO issued by May 19, 2020, but provided no support for what specifically

would occur on that date that justified a TRO.

As the Court previously noted, Plaintiff delayed 6 days from when it filed this case 

to when it filed its request for a TRO. Now, Plaintiff seeks to require Defendant to respond 

to the TRO request in what amounts to one business day. On this record, Plaintiff has not 

proven an urgency that would necessitate such a result. See e.g. Martin v. Family Lending 

Servs., No. 09-CV-2133-PHX-ROS, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100453, at *3 (D. Ariz. Oct. 

15, 2009) (citation omitted) (noting that a plaintiff may not create her own emergency to 

circumvent the notice requirement in seeking a TRO). Similar to Martin, the Court finds 

Plaintiff cannot create its own emergency and deprive Defendants of a reasonable time to 

respond.

Case 2:20-cv-00893-JAT Document 15 Filed 05/15/20 Page 1 of 2
- 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

Thus, the Court will give Defendants the same six days to respond that Plaintiff 

needed to file the TRO. If specific, imminent action is threated against Plaintiff, Plaintiff 

may file a request to accelerate briefing. But on this record, Plaintiff has not shown 

imminent action is threatened. 

In their response, Defendants must address: 1) the arguments made in Plaintiff’s 

motion and supplement; 2) whether (and when) action may be taken against Plaintiff (and

specify what action(s) might be taken); 3) whether the issues raise in the TRO are 

remediable by money damages; and 4) what bond amount Defendants seek if a TRO is 

granted.

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED Defendants shall respond to the Motion for TRO (Doc. 11) by 

May 20, 2020. Plaintiff shall reply by May 21, 2020.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Clerk of the Court shall re-docket Doc. 14 as a 

supplement to Doc. 11, rather than a motion.

Dated this 15th day of May, 2020.

Case 2:20-cv-00893-JAT Document 15 Filed 05/15/20 Page 2 of 2