Case 6:12-cv-01102-RBD-KRS    Document 40    Filed 02/26/13    Page 1 of 2 PageID 299

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION


MARK E. SCHMIDTER and
JULIAN P. HEICKLEN,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

BELVIN PERRY, JR.,

Defendant.
_________________________


ORDER

    This cause is before the Court on Plaintiff Heicklen’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 39), filed February 25, 2013.

    Plaintiff Heicklen moves the Court to issue a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) preventing his arraignment on February 21, 2013, in the Circuit Court for the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County, Florida. (Doc. 39.) The Court received the motion on February 25, 2013. Because the Court did not receive the motion until after the scheduled date of the arraignment, the relief requested cannot be granted and the motion is hereby denied as moot.

    Further, even if the Court were to address the motion on the merits, it would deny the motion pursuant to the Anti-Injunction Act, which provides that “[a] court of the United States may not grant an injunction to stay proceedings in a State court except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress, or where necessary in aid of its jurisdiction, or to protect or effectuate its judgments.” 28 U.S.C. § 2283; see also Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp., 486 U.S. 140, 146 (1988) (“Due in no small part to the fundamental constitutional independence of the States, . . . state proceedings should normally be allowed to continue unimpaired by intervention of the lower federal courts, with relief from error, if any, through the state appellate courts and ultimately [the U.S. Supreme Court].” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Locomotive Eng’rs, 398 U.S. 281, 295 (1970) (“[A] federal court does not have inherent power to ignore the limitations of [the Anti-Injunction Act] and to enjoin state court proceedings merely because those proceedings interfere with a protected federal right . . . .”).

    Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff Heicklen’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 39) is DENIED AS MOOT.


    DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on February 26, 2013.


(signature here)____________
ROY B. DALTON, JR.
United States District Judge


Copies:
Pro Se Party
Counsel of Record