Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01707/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01707-0/pdf.json

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MD BEAUTY, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

DENNIS GROSS, et. al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-1707 SBA

Related to: C 03-3082 SBA

ORDER

[Docket No. 39]

This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ request to continue the September 27,

2005 hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction. On the same date, Defendants have

set for hearing a Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion to Stay Proceedings. Defendants

request that the Court continue hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion until at least 35 days after it rules on

Plaintiffs’ motion. Defendants assert that holding both hearings on the same date will require

Defendants to prepare an Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction despite the fact that

the Court may rule in their favor on the Motion to Dismiss and thereby moot Plaintiffs’ motion. 

Plaintiffs have filed an Opposition to Defendants’ request.

Here, the Court finds that hearing both motions on the same date will conserve judicial

resources and will allow the Court to expeditiously address the parties’ pending motions. Moreover,

the Court finds that the potential harm to Defendants – preparing an opposition to a motion that may

become moot – is not substantial, particularly in light of the potential harm to Plaintiffs if the

hearing on their Motion for Preliminary Injunction is delayed. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 6-3(a).
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

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants’ request to continue the hearing on Plaintiffs’

Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: 7/25/05 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge