FSC 2257 Injunction Now VOID
 

N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Walker D. Miller
Civil Action No. 05cv01126WDMBNB
FREE SPEECH COALITION, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ALBERTO GONZALES, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United
States,
Defendant.
__________________________________________________ __________________
ORDER PARTIALLY VACATING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND
ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING THIS CASE
__________________________________________________ ___________________
Miller, J.
By agreement of the parties, and for the reasons stated on the record at a status hearing held April 25, 2007, it is ordered:
1. ¶ 2 of my December 28, 2005 preliminary injunction order (Docket No. 60)concerning producers who are not involved in hiring, contracting for, managing,or otherwise arranging for the participation of the depicted performer is vacated.

2. Defendant need not respond to Plaintiffs’ motion to alter or amend (Docket No.112) at this time. This motion remains pending and if this case is reopened,Defendant may respond within 20 days of the order reopening the case.

3. This case shall be administratively closed pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2,but may be reopened upon any party filing a motion to reopen demonstrating good cause, on or before May 1, 2008. If no motion to reopen, or motion to extend the deadline is filed by that date, this case may be dismissed without Case 1:05-cv-01126-WDM-BNB Document 121 Filed 05/02/2007 Page 1 of 2
2 PDF FINAL
prejudice without further notice.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, on May 1, 2007.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Walker D. Miller
United States District Judge
http://www.gfy.com/skins/gfy/images/...ser_online.gif

Re: FSC 2257 Injunction Now VOID
 

Hmmm.. that doesn't seem good. :(

Re: FSC 2257 Injunction Now VOID
 

I'm sure it's because of 4472 which made the term "secondary producer" void and thus made the current injunction that only protected secondary producers in the first place, void. I'm guessing they'll be filing for a new one.