2:25-cv-575-APG-BNW MOTION HEARING - ROUGH DRAFT - DO NOT CITE!!!
56 the horizon, fortunately, but, you know, we do see urgency and we didn't want to forego any of the rights should the situation become even more pressing, more dire than it already is. THE COURT: So there wasn't a rush until Kalshi filed its motion? MS. WHELAN: Well, prior to Kalshi filing its motion, the parties were attempting to work together and negotiate some sort of solution, and when that -- and when it became apparent that that was not going to work, they filed their motion and we determined it was appropriate to file a counter-motion in response. THE COURT: If Kalshi is in violation, the defendants can still go after it -- MS. WHELAN: Certainly.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
THE COURT: -- if I don't block it with a TRO. I guess I'm trying to figure out, what's the
difference in tomorrow versus next week versus next month, the need for speed to stop them right now when we haven't stopped them in the last six weeks or whenever your client found out about it. MS. WHELAN: Sure. Well, I mean, one of the things that counsel has argued here today is the harm that would happen in -- for basically pressing pause on options that are outstanding right now, the contracts that have been entered and not yet closed out. And so the longer that it goes on without
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Judy K. Moore, RMR, CRR
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs