Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-02508/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-02508-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark 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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Acushnet Company, a Delaware 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

Thomas Allan Thiede a/k/a Thomas 

Thiede a/k/a Tom Thiede a/k/a Tom T., 

an individual, d/b/a Showcase Studios 

d/b/a Showcase Companies d/b/a 

Showcase Architectural Products d/b/a 

Showcase Custom Homes, Inc. d/b/a 

Makeovermygaragedoor.com and Does 

1-10, 

 Defendants. 

No. CV 12-02508-PHX-JAT 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

EMERGENCY EX PARTE

APPLICATION FOR: 

(1) TEMPORARY RESTRAINING 

ORDER AND SEIZURE ORDER; 

(2) ORDER RESTRAINING THE 

TRANSFER OF ASSETS TIED TO 

THE COUNTERFEITING 

OPERATION; (3) ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY 

INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT 

ENTER; (4) SUBSTITUTE 

CUSTODIAN ORDER; AND 

(5) EXPEDITED DISCOVERY 

[Filed Under Seal] 

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Emergency Ex Parte Application for: 

(1) temporary restraining order and seizure order; (2) order to show cause why a 

preliminary injunction should not issue; (3) order restraining assets tied to the 

counterfeiting operation; (4) substitute custodian order; and (5) order for expedited 

discovery. (Doc. 5). 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 1 of 12
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 

I. BACKGROUND 

A. Plaintiff Acushnet Company (“Acushnet”) is the owner of all rights in and 

to the following trademarks protected by the following United States Federal 

Trademark Registrations: 

Trademark 

Registration 

Number 

Registration 

Date Class(es)/Goods 

2,620,432 September 

17, 2002 

IC 28- Golf clubs and accessories, 

namely golf tees, golf gloves, golf 

bags, golf putters, golf drivers, golf 

woods, golf irons, golf green repair 

tools, golf club covers, and golf bag 

covers. 

SCOTTY 

CAMERON 2,525,024 January 1, 

2002 

IC 28 – Golf clubs and accessories 

thereof 

TITLEIST 934,406 May 23, 

1972 

IC 28- Golf equipment comprising 

golf balls, golf clubs, golf bags, golf 

gloves and golf covers 

1,155,766 May 26, 

1981 

IC 28- Golf Equipment-Namely, Golf

Balls, Golf Clubs and Golf Bags. 

3,376,961 February 5, 

2008 

IC 24 – Golf towels 

IC 25 – Clothing, namely, jackets, 

shirts, hats and visors 

IC 28 – Golf equipment, namely, golf 

putters, golf club head covers, golf 

club grips and divot tools 

TOUR RAT 4,189,312 August 14, 

2012 IC 28 – Golf balls; golf putter covers

These trademarks are registered in International Class 28 and are used in connection 

with the manufacture and distribution of, among other things, high quality golf club 

headcovers. Additionally, Acushnet is the owner of all common law rights in and to the 

JUNKYARD DOG and SCOTTY’S CUSTOM SHOP marks as associated with 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 2 of 12
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 

 3 

clothing, including shirts and golf club headcovers (the above-identified common law 

and registered marks shall collectively be referred to herein as the “Acushnet Marks”). 

B. Plaintiff sells and otherwise distributes its respective products, including 

golf club headcovers and clothing products, including shirts, in the United States. 

C. Defendant is Thomas Allan Thiede a/k/a Thomas Thiede a/k/a Tom 

Thiede a/k/a Tom T., an individual, d/b/a Showcase Studios d/b/a Showcase Companies 

d/b/a Showcase Architectural Products d/b/a Showcase Custom Homes, Inc. d/b/a 

Makeovermygaragedoor.com. 

D. Plaintiff has proffered sufficient evidence to show that Defendant has 

manufactured, advertised, promoted, offered for sale, and/or distributed, golf club 

headcovers and clothing products, including shirts, using labeling with counterfeits, 

reproductions, and/or colorable imitations of the Acushnet Marks. 

E. Defendant is not now, nor has he ever been, authorized or licensed to use, 

reproduce, or make counterfeits, reproductions, and/or colorable imitations of the 

Acushnet Marks, or to distribute or sell golf club headcovers and/or clothing products, 

including shirts, bearing counterfeit or infringing versions of the Acushnet Marks. 

II. ANALYSIS 

 Pursuant to the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.) as amended by the 

Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984, Public Law 98-473, and Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 65, this Court is authorized to grant Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 5). In 

considering 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)(4)(B) and the factors the Ninth Circuit has established 

for granting preliminary relief, see Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1127 (9th 

Cir. 2009), the Court finds:

A. Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits and has a very strong 

probability of proving at trial that consumers are likely to be confused by Defendant’s 

manufacturing, advertisement, promotion, sale, offer for sale, and/or distribution of golf 

club headcovers and clothing products, including shirts, bearing counterfeits, 

reproductions, and/or colorable imitations of the Acushnet Marks. (Doc. 5 at 16-23). 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 3 of 12
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 

 4 

B. Plaintiff is likely to suffer an immediate and irreparable injury if a 

temporary restraining order and preliminary relief is not granted. It clearly appears 

from the following specific facts, as set forth in Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint (Doc. 6) 

and the sworn Declarations on file (Doc. 5 at 32-146), and explained in Plaintiff’s 

motion (Doc. 5 at 23-25), that immediate and irreparable loss, damage, and injury will 

result to Plaintiff and to consumers before Defendant can be heard in opposition unless 

Plaintiff’s request for ex parte relief is granted: (1) Defendant has offered for sale golf 

club headcovers and clothing products, including shirts, bearing counterfeit and 

infringing trademarks in violation of Plaintiff’s rights; (2) Plaintiff has well-founded 

fears that more counterfeit and infringing products bearing its trademarks will appear in 

the marketplace; that consumers may be misled, confused, and disappointed by the 

quality of these products, resulting in the consequent injury to Plaintiff’s reputation and 

goodwill; and that Plaintiff may suffer loss of sales for its genuine products; (3) 

Plaintiff has well-founded fears that if it proceeds on notice to Defendant on this 

Application, Defendant will secret, conceal, destroy, sell off, or otherwise dispose of his 

counterfeit and infringing goods, software and equipment used to manufacture the 

counterfeit and infringing goods, packaging, and records relating thereto in his 

possession and/or inform his suppliers and others of Plaintiff’s claims with the result 

that those suppliers and others may also secret, conceal, sell off, or otherwise dispose of 

counterfeit or infringing goods, equipment used to manufacture the counterfeit and 

infringing goods, packaging, and records relating thereto in their possession and 

control. 

C. The balance of potential harm to Defendant if a temporary restraining 

order, seizure order, and substitute custodian order are issued is far outweighed by the 

potential harm to Plaintiff if they are not issued. 

D. The public interest favors issuance of the temporary restraining order and 

seizure order. 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 4 of 12
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 

 5 

E. If Defendant is given notice of the application for a temporary restraining 

order and seizure order, he is likely to destroy, move, hide, or otherwise make 

inaccessible to Plaintiff and the Court the matter to be seized. 

F. The counterfeit and infringing goods, software and equipment used to 

manufacture the goods at issue, and business records related to the counterfeit goods to 

be seized will likely be found at: 

Thomas Allan Thiede a/k/a Thomas Thiede 

a/k/a Tom Thiede a/k/a Tom T., an individual, 

d/b/a Showcase Studios d/b/a Showcase Companies 

d/b/a Showcase Architectural Products d/b/a Showcase Custom Homes, 

Inc. d/b/a Makeovermygaragedoor.com 

9550 East Thunderbird Road, #224 

Scottsdale, Arizona 85260 

G. Plaintiff has given notice of its Application for an ex parte seizure order 

to the United States Attorney for this Judicial District pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1116(d)(2). 

H. Plaintiff has not publicized the requested seizure in any way. 

I. For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court finds an order other than an ex 

parte seizure order is not adequate to achieve the purposes of 15 U.S.C. § 1114. 

III. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER 

Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte temporary restraining order is granted as 

follows: 

 Defendant, his respective officers, directors, employees, agents, subsidiaries, 

distributors, and all persons in active concert or participation with any of them are 

hereby temporarily restrained: 

A. From manufacturing, advertising, promoting, offering to sell, selling, 

distributing, or transferring any products, product packaging, software, embroidery 

patterns, or labeling bearing the Acushnet Marks identified in section IA above, or any 

confusingly similar marks, other than those actually manufactured and distributed by 

Plaintiff; 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 5 of 12
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 

 6 

B. From communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person or persons 

(a) from whom Defendant purchased or obtained products, materials, software or 

embroidery patterns used to counterfeit and infringe the Acushnet Marks identified in 

section I(A) above; or (b) to whom Defendant sold or offered to sell his finished 

products; or (c) whom Defendant knows or reasonably believes to possess, control, or 

have access to any such products, materials, software or embroidery patterns; 

C. From otherwise communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person(s) 

about this action, or Plaintiff’s Application for this Order, except for Defendant’s 

attorneys; 

D. From secreting, concealing, destroying, selling off, transferring, or 

otherwise disposing of: (a) any products or product packaging not manufactured or 

distributed by Plaintiff bearing the Acushnet Marks, or any confusingly similar marks; 

or (b) any documentary or electronic records or similar evidence, software, embroidery 

patterns and/or equipment relating to the manufacture, sale, offer for sale, distribution, 

or transfer of any patterns, products or product packaging bearing any of the Acushnet 

Marks or colorable imitations thereof; 

E. From knowingly instructing, aiding, or abetting any other person or 

business entity in engaging in any of the activities referred to in paragraphs A through 

D of this section. 

IV. SEIZURE ORDER AND SUBSTITUTE CUSTODIAN ORDER 

 Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte seizure order and substitute custodian order 

is granted as follows:

A. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)(9), the United States Marshal or other 

Federal or law enforcement official (such as officers or agents of the United States 

Customs Service, Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, or United States Post 

Office) or a State or local law enforcement officer (on or off duty), shall carry out the 

seizure as provided herein, and Defendant shall surrender for seizure (1) all products, 

packaging, software, and embroidery patterns bearing the Acushnet Marks, or any other 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 6 of 12
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 

 7 

mark substantially indistinguishable from either of those marks; together with (2) all 

documents, things, and records of any kind relating to the purchase, acquisition, 

manufacture, insurance of, advertising, promotion, sale, offering for sale, distribution, 

and transfer of such products and packaging, including, but not limited to, computer 

disks, CD ROMs, computer hardware, and other magnetically or electronically stored 

information; and all manufacturing, embroidery or packaging equipment, molds, logos, 

emblems, patches, matrices, computers, computer software, and any other means of 

making the same, including, but not limited to, machinery designed for the purpose of 

making, embroidering or packaging products sold under the Acushnet Marks or any 

parts of the foregoing. The law enforcement officers executing this Seizure Order may 

look for the documents and things to be seized and may appoint any other persons, 

including Plaintiff’s counsel, investigators, and Plaintiff’s representative(s), to assist in 

the execution of this Seizure Order. 

B. The seizure shall be carried out at the location referred to in section II(F) 

above and any unknown locations operated by the Defendant, including any 

warehouses, storage facilities, and offices where the Defendant, including the Doe 

Defendants, are warehousing, holding, or storing any items or documents subject to 

surrender and seizure under the terms of this Order. This does not include, however, 

any other residences not referred to in section II(F) above. 

C. Any materials seized by the law enforcement officials executing this 

Seizure Order shall be delivered up into the custody of the following temporary 

custodians appointed by the Court (Plaintiff’s counsel, Stephen M. Gaffigan, P.A., 401 

East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 130-453, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301, and Osborn 

Maledon, P.A., 2929 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100, Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2794) 

pending the hearing provided for herein, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1116(d)(10). 

However, Plaintiff shall be allowed to examine samples of the seized products for 

authenticity at its facility in Massachusetts, and shall return to Defendant or his counsel, 

all genuine products seized, if any. 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 7 of 12
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 

 8 

D. The seizure shall take place no later than seven (7) days after the issuance 

of this Order, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)(5)(C). 

E. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)(5)(D), Plaintiff shall post a bond in the 

amount of $10,000.00 as payment of damages to which Defendant may be entitled for a 

wrongful seizure or wrongful attempted seizure, prior to conducting the seizure ordered 

herein. 

F. A seizure confirmation hearing pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)(10)(A) 

shall take place on Wednesday December 19, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. MST unless Plaintiff 

shows good cause for another date or unless Defendant consents to another date. 

G. Plaintiff and/or its designees shall be permitted to videotape and take 

photographs and notes of the seizure. 

H. The U.S. Marshals, or any other law enforcement officer, is authorized to 

use reasonable force necessary to effect the seizure ordered (including breaking open 

entrances to buildings and rooms therein) and to inspect the contents of any rooms, 

warehouses, closets, safes, cabinets, furniture, containers, and desks at or within the 

above-identified location within this Judicial District. 

I. Plaintiff shall hold harmless and indemnify the United States Marshal’s 

Office and other law enforcement agencies and their employees from any and all claims 

asserted in any court or tribunal, arising from any acts, incidents, or occurrences in 

connection with the seizure and possession of the Defendant’s property, including any 

third party claims. 

J. Only the items listed in this Order shall be seized and impounded, and 

due care shall be taken by the United States Marshal or other law enforcement officers 

and their appointed assistants to preserve and keep in good order Defendant’s property 

and assets which are not related to the manufacture, packaging, or distribution of the 

alleged counterfeit and infringing products referred to above. 

K. At the time of the seizure all items shall be appropriately marked for 

identification, and Defendant shall be given a receipt and/or inventory list thereof. In 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 8 of 12
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 

 9 

addition, the United States Marshal or other law enforcement officer shall file an 

inventory list with the Court within forty-eight (48) hours after the seizure has been 

carried out. 

L. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(d)(8), this Order, together with the 

supporting documents, shall be sealed until Defendant has an opportunity to contest this 

Order, except that Defendant shall have access to this Order and supporting documents 

after the seizure has been carried out. 

V. ORDER RESTRAINING THE TRANSFER OF ASSETS

 In order to preserve the status quo and under the authority granted to this Court 

by 15 U.S.C. § 1117 to freeze the assets of a defendant under the Lanham Act, see

Reebok Int’l Ltd. v. Marnatech Enters. Inc., 737 F.Supp. 1521, 1526 (S.D. Cal. 1989); 

see also Reebok Int’l Ltd. v. Marnatech Enters. Inc., 970 F.2d 552, 558-561 (9th Cir. 

1992) (affirming district court’s authority to freeze assets granted by the Lanham Act), 

Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte order restraining the transfer of assets is granted 

as follows: 

A. Prior to having Defendant’s assets frozen, Plaintiff shall serve this Order 

on Paypal, Inc. (“Paypal”) and any related companies and affiliates as described in 

paragraph D of this section. 

B. Upon service of this Order by Plaintiff, Paypal and any related companies 

and affiliates, shall immediately restrain and limit all accounts controlled and/or used 

by the Defendant and/or his aliases identified in section I(C) above and/or in the name 

of Showcase Studios, Showcase Companies, Showcase Architectural Products, 

Showcase Custom Homes, Inc., Makeovermygaragedoor.com and/or 

showcasecompanies@cox.net. 

C. Paypal shall further, within five (5) days of receiving this Order, provide 

Plaintiff’s counsel with all data which identifies the accounts frozen as well as an 

accounting of the funds in the restrained accounts. Such restraint of the accounts and 

the disclosure of the related financial institution account information shall be made 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 9 of 12
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 

 10 

without prior notice to the account owners or the financial institutions until further 

order of this Court. 

D. Any financial institutions, and any related companies and affiliates, 

including those identified by Paypal in connection with paragraphs B and C in this 

section, (the “Financial Institutions”), which hold funds on behalf of or derived from 

the Defendant’s business, upon receipt of notice of this Order, shall immediately 

restrain and limit all accounts controlled and/or used by the Defendant and/or his aliases 

identified in section I(C) above and/or in the name of Showcase Studios, Showcase 

Companies, Showcase Architectural Products, Showcase Custom Homes, Inc., 

Makeovermygaragedoor.com and showcasecompanies@cox.net. 

E. The Financial Institutions shall further, within five (5) days of receiving 

this Order, provide Plaintiff’s counsel with all data which identifies the accounts 

restrained as well as an accounting of the funds in the restrained accounts. Such 

restraint of the accounts and the disclosure of the related financial institution account 

information shall be made without prior notice to the account owners or the financial 

institutions until further order of this Court. 

F. Within five (5) days of serving Paypal and any other Financial Institutions 

under paragraph D of this section, but no later than Friday December 14, 2012, Plaintiff 

shall give notice to the Court identifying all accounts affected by this section and the 

amount(s) of assets restrained and limited in those accounts. 

VI. EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ORDER 

Plaintiff is authorized to immediately propound requests for production of 

documents and interrogatories, and the Defendant is hereby required to serve his 

response within five (5) days of service of the Plaintiff’s requests. Additionally, 

Plaintiff is hereby authorized to conduct the depositions of the Named Defendant, and 

any corporate representatives of the identified aliases, within two (2) days of receiving 

the Defendant’s responses to the discovery requests. Defendant is hereby ordered to 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 10 of 12
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 

 11 

have the appropriate representative(s) appear for deposition at the date and time noticed 

by Plaintiff. 

VII. ORDER SETTING PRELIMINARY-INJUNCTION HEARING 

Plaintiff’s application for an ex parte order for Defendant to show cause why a 

preliminary injunction should not issue is granted as follows:

A. Based upon the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint (Doc. 6) and motion (Doc. 

5), the Court finds Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief. Therefore, pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(3) Defendant is hereby ordered to appear to show 

cause why an order should not issue granting the injunctive relief requested in 

Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 5) before the Court in the United States Courthouse located at 

401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona, in Courtroom 503 on Wednesday 

December 19, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. MST. 

B. Further, Defendant shall respond in writing opposing Plaintiff’s motion 

(Doc. 5) and explain why a preliminary-injunction should not issue. Defendant’s 

Response shall be filed with the Court and served on counsel for Plaintiff within five 

(5) days after being served with this Order. Plaintiff shall file a Reply with the Court 

and serve it on the Defendant within two (2) days of Defendant filing his Response with 

the Court but not later than Friday December 14, 2012. 

C. If Defendant does not respond in writing to Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 5) 

within five (5) days of being served with this Order or if Defendant fails to appear at the 

hearing set for Wednesday December 19, 2012, the Court will deem either failure to be 

Defendant’s consent to the motion being granted. Local Rule Civ. 7.2(i). 

D. Service or delivery of copies of this order and the papers in support 

thereof on Defendant or his attorney at the time of the seizure, or within three (3) days 

after the seizure if there is no party present at the seizure that is authorized to accept 

service, shall be given and as so given shall be deemed good and sufficient service 

thereof. 

VIII. CONCLUSION 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 11 of 12
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 

 12 

 Based on the foregoing, 

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Emergency Ex Parte Application for: 

(1) temporary restraining order and seizure order; (2) order to show cause why a 

preliminary injunction should not issue; (3) order restraining assets tied to the 

counterfeiting operation; (4) substitute custodian order; and (5) order for expedited 

discovery (Doc. 5). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendant shall file with the Court and serve 

on counsel for Plaintiff within five (5) days after being served with this Order, a 

Compliance Report in writing and under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and 

form in which Defendant has complied with this Order. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, as explained in section IV of this Order, the 

parties shall appear before the Court on Wednesday December 19, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. 

MST, in Courtroom 503, for a seizure confirmation hearing pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1116(d)(10)(A) unless Plaintiff shows good cause for another date or unless 

Defendant consents to another date. 

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED, as explained in section VII of this Order, the 

parties shall appear before the Court on Wednesday December 19, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. 

MST, in Courtroom 503, and Defendant shall show cause why a preliminary 

injunction should not issue. 

 Dated this 5th day of December, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. MST. 

Copies to Only: Counsel for Plaintiff 

Case 2:12-cv-02508-JAT Document 17 Filed 12/05/12 Page 12 of 12