Filed 10/24/13 Mirabadi v. Bazikian CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE

PARVIN A. MIRABADI, Plaintiff and Respondent.

v. JACQUELINE BAZIKIAN, Defendant and Appellant, B244085 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LS022966)

APPEAL from an order of the Supe rior Court of Los Angeles County, Leland B. Harris, Judge. Dismissed as moot. Jacqueline Bazikian, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

___________________ ____________________2 Jacqueline Bazikian appeals from a restrain ing order entered against her in a civil harassment proceeding brought by Parvin Mirabadi. The restraining order expired in August 2013. We will accordingl y dismiss the appeal as moot. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Mirabadi performed liposuction on B azikian on July 20, 2005. Bazikian subsequently complained that Mirabadi caus ed “nerve damage” in her arms and filed a malpractice action against Mirabadi and a se parate lawsuit against the anesthesiologist who assisted with the surgery. The actions were dismissed. 1 Bazikian proceeded to send letters to Mirabadi and a member of her staff threatening them with criminal prosecution. On June 26, 2012, Mirabadi initiated this civil harassmen t proceeding under Code of Civil Procedure sect ion 527.6 in which she reques ted orders to stop Bazikian from harassing her and her staff. The court issued a temporary re straining order and notice of hearing. After a hearing on Augu st 6, 2012, the court issued a permanent restraining order for the pe riod of one year restraini ng Bazikian from harassing Mirabadi and two of her employees. Bazikian moved for reconsideration of the order. The court denied the motion on the grounds that there was “clear and convin cing evidence that Bazikian ha[d] engaged in a years long campaign of harassment . . . directed toward Dr. Mirabadi,” that Bazikian had threatened Mirabadi and her st aff, and that she had “repeatedly state[d],

1 Bazikian also filed a complaint with the Department of Consumer Affairs’ Medical Board; however, the record does not show how the comp laint was resolved.3 ‘You can not stop me[]’ . . . [t ]hereby evidencing that unless otherwise restrained by the Court, Bazikian w[ould] continue on her lo ng established and continuing course of conduct.” Bazikian timely appealed. DISCUSSION The appeal is moot because the order re straining Bazikian expired on August 6, 2013. (See, e.g., Environmental Charter High School v. Centinela Valley Union High School District (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 139, 144 [“If relief granted by the trial court is temporal, and if the relief granted expires before an appeal can be heard, then an appeal by the adverse party is moot. [Citation.]”].)4 DISPOSITION The appeal is dismissed. Respondent sh all recover her costs, if any, on appeal

.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

CROSKEY, Acting P. J.
WE CONCUR:

KITCHING, J.

ALDRICH, J.