Hamilton v. ConocoPhillips Company

• Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
• Decided: February 26, 2022
• Docket: 6:22-cv-00001
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT February 26, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk VICTORIA DIVISION LLOYD MICHAEL HAMILTON, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Case No. 6:22-CV-00001 § CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY and § BURLINGTON RESOURCES OIL § & GAS COMPANY LP, § § Defendants. § ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Lloyd Michael Hamilton’s February 18, 2022 Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order to Maintain Status Quo. (Dkt. No. 11). Defendants ConocoPhillips Company and Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Company LP (“Defendants”) filed a Response, (Dkt. No. 16), to which Hamilton replied, (Dkt. No. 19). On February 25, 2022, the Court held a hearing on Hamilton’s Motion and heard argument from the Parties. Based on its review of the briefing and the arguments presented during the hearing, the Court DENIES Hamilton’s Motion. The standard for issuing a TRO is the same as the standard for issuing a preliminary injunction. See Clark v. Prichard, 812 F.2d 991, 993 (5th Cir. 1987). This standard requires that Hamilton establish (1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; (2) a substantial threat of irreparable injury if the injunction is not issued; (3) that the threatened injury if the injunction is denied outweighs any harm that will result if the injunction is granted; and (4) that the grant of an injunction will not disserve the public interest. Friends of Lydia Ann Channel v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 701 F. App’x 352, 355 (5th Cir. 2017) (Jones, J.). The Court finds that Hamilton has not satisfied this standard. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff Lloyd Michael Hamilton’s Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order to Maintain Status Quo. It is SO ORDERED. Signed on February 26, 2022. Dew & DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE