Ravalli County Republican Central Committee v. LINDA McCULLOCH

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAVALLI COUNTY REPUBLICAN
CENTRAL COMMITTEE; GALLATIN
COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; SANDERS COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; DAWSON COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; STILLWATER COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; RICHLAND COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; CARBON COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; FLATHEAD COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; MADISON COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; BIG HORN COUNTY
REPUBLICAN CENTRAL
COMMITTEE; MONTANA
REPUBLICAN PARTY,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
LINDA McCULLOCH, in her official
capacity as Montana’s Secretary of State;
REGINA PLETTENBERG, in her official
No. 15-35967
DC. No. 6:14 cv-0058 BMM
D Mont., Helena
ORDER
FILED
JUL 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 4 --

capacity as the Election Administrator of
Ravalli County; CHARLOTTE MILLS, n
her official capacity as the Election
Administrator of Gallatin County; BOBBI
CHRISTENSEN, in her official capacity
as the Election Administrator of Sanders
County; SHIRLEY KREIMAN, in her
official capacity as the Election
Administrator of Dawson County;
PAULINE MISHLER, in her capacity as
the Election Administrator of Stillwater
County; STEPHANIE VERHASSELT, in
her official capacity as the Election
Administrator for Richland County; JUDY
CHRISTENSEN, in her official capacity
as the Election Administrator for Carbon
County; PAULA ROBINSON, in her
official capacity as the Election
Administrator for Flathead County;
PEGGY STEMLER, in her official
capacity as the Election Administrator for
Madison county; KIMBERLY
YARLOTT, in her official capacity as the
Election Administrator for Big Horn
County,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding
2

-- 2 of 4 --

Submission Deferred May 4, 2016
Portland, Oregon
Submitted July 20, 2016*
Before: TASHIMA, TALLMAN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from the denial of a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs’
motion sought the preliminary injunction to prohibit certain action by State
officials with respect to the then-approaching June 2016 primary election. Because
we cannot grant effective relief with respect to an election that has already taken
place, this action is moot. See Vegas Diamond Props. LLC v. FDIC, 669 F.3d 933,
936, (9th Cir. 2012) (“This action is moot becuase the activities sought to be
enjoined have already occurred and can no longer be prevented.”).
Moreover, County Committee Plaintiffs-Appellants have voluntarily
dismissed the underlying action with prejudice. The office of a preliminary
injunction is, of course, to grant necessary injunctive relief pendente lite and its
term of office expires once the litigation comes to an end. Here, the dismissal of
the underlying action has obviated any need to consider preliminary injunctive
relief. To the extent that appellants seek to raise other or broader issues, they have
* The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
3

-- 3 of 4 --

now noticed another pending appeal from the order dismissing the action, in No.
16-35375, where, presumably, such questions can be litigated.
Appeal DISMISSED. No costs.
4

-- 4 of 4 --