Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 19, 2020

Wheel Choice, LLC v. Sainty Group, Inc.

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:20-cv-05629
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Preliminary InjunctionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Wheel Choice v. Sainty Group, Judge Seibel ordered more evidence for an injunction request because past sales did not show imminent harm.

Who this affects

Wheel Choice, LLC and the defendants listed in the caption, including Sainty Group (U.S.A.), Inc., Jiangsu Sainty Machinery and Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd, and Choice Auto, Inc.; the order also contains a separate service list naming the Town of New Windsor, Detective Frank Volpe, and Detective Kevin Moore.

What happened

Wheel Choice, LLC asked the court for an injunction, which is a court order meant to stop conduct. The court said Wheel Choice had to show that it was likely to suffer harm that could not be adequately compensated with money.

Wheel Choice presented evidence that the sales it wanted to stop occurred in June and November 2019. The court found that Wheel Choice had not presented evidence of conduct that was imminent.

Judge Cathy Seibel requested that Wheel Choice supplement its application by August 26, 2020. She also directed Wheel Choice to serve its amended complaint and other motion papers on the defendants by overnight express and email by August 21, 2020. The order did not grant or deny the requested injunction.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Wheel Choice, LLC v. Sainty Group, Inc. · No. 7:20-cv-05629
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
Aug. 19, 2020

Background

Wheel Choice, LLC sought injunctive relief—an order requiring a party to stop or refrain from conduct. The court stated that a party seeking this relief must show a likely irreparable injury, meaning an actual and imminent injury for which money would not provide adequate compensation.

Court’s Analysis

Wheel Choice submitted evidence that the sales it sought to enjoin occurred in June and November 2019. The court concluded that Wheel Choice had not submitted evidence of imminent conduct. The opinion does not identify additional details about the underlying dispute or explain the specific conduct at issue beyond the sales described in the order.

Ruling and Instructions

Judge Cathy Seibel requested that Wheel Choice supplement its application by August 26, 2020. The court also directed Wheel Choice to serve its amended complaint and other motion papers on the defendants by overnight express and email by August 21, 2020. The order did not state that the injunction application was granted or denied.

Parties Listed for Service

The caption lists Sainty Group (U.S.A.), Inc., Jiangsu Sainty Machinery and Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd, and Choice Auto, Inc. as defendants. A separate service list in the opinion instead identifies the Town of New Windsor, Detective Frank Volpe, and Detective Kevin Moore. The opinion does not explain this apparent discrepancy.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.