2:26-cv-02389•Kiosko Multiservicios LLC v. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network et al
Kiosko Multiservicios LLC v. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network et al
2:26-cv-02389Azd14 avr. 2026
Texte intégral
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 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Kiosko Multiservicios LLC, Plaintiff, v. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, et al., Defendants. No. CV-26-02389-PHX-KML ORDER Plaintiff Kiosko Multiservicios LLC filed this suit on April 7, 2026. (Doc. 1.) Kiosko later provided proof it sent summonses and copies of the complaint to 1) The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; 2) the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; 3) the U.S. Department of Treasury; 4) the Secretary of the Treasury; and 5) the Attorney General. (Docs. 7-11.) Kiosko apparently did not send a copy of the summons and complaint to the civil-process clerk at the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona as Rule 4 requires. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(A)(ii). On April 14, 2026, Kiosko filed a motion for temporary restraining order. (Doc. 14.) When doing so, Kiosko indicated in the docket text it was seeking an “ex parte” order. The body of its motion does not reflect it is seeking relief before defendants can be heard but, even if Kiosko were seeking such relief, it has not complied with the requirements for obtaining that relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(B). Kiosko’s motion states it was served via regular mail on the same five entities and individuals who were sent summons. (Doc. 14 at 22.) Again, there is no evidence Kiosko sent anything to the United States Attorney’s Case 2:26-cv-02389-KML Document 16 Filed 04/14/26 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 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 Office for the District of Arizona. Kiosko is not entitled to a temporary restraining order without notice. Reno Air Racing Ass’n., Inc. v. McCord, 452 F.3d 1126, 1131 (9th Cir. 2006) (“[C]ircumstances justifying the issuance of an ex parte order are extremely limited.”). But the court sets an expedited briefing schedule on Kiosko’s motion. IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 14) is DENIED to the extent it seeks relief without notice. The Motion for Temporary Restraining Order with notice remains pending. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED no later than April 21, 2026, defendants shall file their opposition to the Motion for Temporary Restraining order. Plaintiff shall file its reply no later than April 27, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion to Exceed Page Limits (Doc. 15) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as soon as practicable, plaintiff shall provide a copy of this order and the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona and file proof of service. Dated this 14th day of April, 2026. Case 2:26-cv-02389-KML Document 16 Filed 04/14/26 Page 2 of 2
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.