Preview:

JACOB ASH HOLDINGS, INC.,

Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10 0066
WINTER CONCEPTS, INC., Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Gary L. Lancaster,
Chief Judge. February 2S:'"2 0 1 0

This is a action breach of contract. Plaintiff, Jacob Ash Holdings, Inc., alleges that defendant, winter Concepts, Inc., breached an agreement by failing to make payment for products, specifically a certain "Ed Hardy" line of winter hats and gloves, that plaintiff manufactured and delivered to defendant's customers. Before the court are plaintiff1s motion for temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction and supplemental motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. Plaintiff asks the court to impose a constructive trust on all accounts receivable due to defendant and on any product that defendant has in its possession. Defendant has filed no response to the motions, nor has it pled in response to the complaint.
For the reasons that follow, the motions will be denied.
I. LEGAL AUTHORITY

\ [T]he grant of injunctive relief is an extraordinary remedy ... which should be granted only in limited circumstances. ' If American Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Winback & Conserve Program, Inc. , 42 F.3d 1421, 1427 (3d Cir. 1994) (quoting Frank's GMC Truck Center, Inc. v. General Motors Corp., 847 F.2d 100, 102 (3d Cir. 1988)). To obtain a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65, the moving party must show: (1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) the extent to which it will suffer irreparable harm without injunctive relief; (3) the extent to which the non-moving party will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is issued; and (4) that granting relief will be in the public interest. Video pipeline, Inc. v. Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Inc., 342 F.3d 191, 196 (3d Cir. 2003) (internal citation and quotation omitted) .1 An injunction should issue only if plaintiff meets its burden in producing evidence sufficient to convince the district court that all four factors favor preliminary reI f. American Tel., 42 F.3d at 1427 (3d Cir. 1994).
Such injunctive relief is not a matter of right. A district court's decision to issue a preliminary injunction is committed to the court's sound discretion. The facts must clearly
The standard for a temporary restraining order is the same as that for a preliminary injunction. McCullough v. Miller, No. 06

Download 57837.pdf

Pennsylvania Law