John Doe v. Regents of The University of California et al

1
22-CV-1506-JES-VET
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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOHN DOE
Plaintiff,
v.
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No.: 22-cv-1506-JES-VET
ORDER:
(1) DENYING MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, and
(2) STRIKING IMPROPER FILINGS.
[ECF No. 224]
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff John Doe’s motion for preliminary injunction.
ECF No. 224.
Rule 65(a) governs preliminary injunctions, the purpose of which is “to preserve the
relative positions of the parties until a trial on the merits can be held.” Univ. of Tex. v.
Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390, 395 (1981); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a). This Court held a
trial on the merits of the instant case in December 2025, and a final judgment was entered
against the Plaintiff. See ECF No. 223. Thus, this motion is improper at this stage in
litigation. See Salazar v. Calderin, No. 2:19-cv-01870-APG-BNW, 2021 WL 982316 at *1
(D. Nev. Mar. 15, 2021) (“A preliminary injunction is an injunction issued before judgment
Case 3:22-cv-01506-JES-VET Document 227 Filed 10/09/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 2

2
22-CV-1506-JES-VET
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
is entered in a case.”) (emphasis added); U.S. Philips Corp. v. KBC Bank N.V., 590 F.3d
1091, 1093–94 (9th Cir. 2010). This Court is aware that Plaintiff has filed an appeal with
the Ninth Circuit, which will provide a more appropriate forum for the relief Plaintiff seeks.
See ECF No. 205.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES the motion. The Court also DIRECTS
the Clerk of the Court to STRIKE the improper filing (ECF No. 224).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 9, 2026
Case 3:22-cv-01506-JES-VET Document 227 Filed 10/09/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 2