Court Opinion

ID: 9402710
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-16 17:01:57.867949+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:02.035057
License: Public Domain

FILED
                                                                                      JUN 16 2023
                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                            MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                                   U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                               FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

 JOHN DOE,                                             No.    22-15757

               Plaintiff-Appellee,                     D.C. No. 3:20-cv-06822-JD

 v.
                                                          ORDER
 ROE 1,

               Defendant-Appellant,

 and

 GOOGLE LLC, et al.,

               Defendants.

      Before: GOULD and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and SELNA,* District Judge.

       John Does’ Motions at Docket Nos. 11 and 14 are denied as moot in view of
the fact that the identity of John Doe has been made public.

        John Does’ request for judicial notice at Docket No. 27 is granted.

        IT IS SO ORDERED.

       *The Honorable James V. Selna, United States District Judge for the Central District of
California, sitting by designation.
                                                                            FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION
                                                                             JUN 16 2023
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                          U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOHN DOE,                                        No.   22-15757

              Plaintiff-Appellee,                D.C. No. 3:20-cv-06822-JD

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
ROE 1,

              Defendant-Appellant,

and

GOOGLE LLC, et al.,

              Defendants.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of California
                     James Donato, District Judge, Presiding

                       Argued and Submitted March 31, 2023
                            San Francisco, California

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Before: GOULD and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and SELNA,** District Judge.

      Roe 1 (“Roe”) seeks to appeal the district court’s April 19, 2022 order “to

the extent” that it denied her motion to vacate the district court’s October 5, 2020

order (“Order”), which restrains Roe from disclosing John Doe’s (“Doe”) identity.

We dismiss this appeal as moot.

      Because we construe the Order as a temporary restraining order, the Order

expired on October 19, 2020. See FED. R. CIV. P. 65(b). The Order was a

temporary restraining order because it was issued ex parte and “specifically”

enjoined Roe and third parties from publishing Doe’s identity. FED. R. CIV. P.

65(d)(1). It cannot be considered a preliminary injunction because the district

court did not provide notice to the adverse parties or hold an adversary hearing.

FED. R. CIV. P. 65(a). But cf. Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61, 87 (1974).

Because the district court never extended the temporary restraining order on the

record, it expired within fourteen days. See FED. R. CIV. P. 65(b)(2). Thus, the

expiration of the Order renders this appeal moot. See, e.g., Where Do We Go

Berkeley v. Cal. Dep’t of Transp., 32 F.4th 852, 857 (9th Cir. 2022).

       DISMISSED AS MOOT.

      **
             The Honorable James V. Selna, United States District Judge for the
Central District of California, sitting by designation.
                                           2