V. Standard of Review
The Commission uses the same test for temporary restraining orders that it uses for preliminary injunctions. (See Westcom Long Distance, Inc. v. Pacific Bell et al., D.94-04-082, 54 CPUC 2d 244, 259; see also Re Standards of Conduct Governing Relationships Between Energy Utilities and Their Affiliates, D.98-12-075, 84 CPUC2d 155, 169.) To obtain a temporary restraining order, the moving party must show (1) a likelihood of prevailing on the merits; (2) irreparable injury to the moving party without the order; (3) no substantial harm to other interested parties; and (4) no harm to the public interest.
Although consideration of the likelihood of complainants' ultimate success on the merits is not a final adjudication of the parties' ultimate rights, it does affect the balancing of the respective hardships between complainants and defendant. For example, the more likely it is that complainants will prevail, the less severe must be the alleged harm if injunctive relief does not issue. (See King v. Meese (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1217, 1227; see also Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Com'n v. Nat. Football (9th Cir. 1980) 634 F.2d 1197, 1201 and 1203 [requiring a showing of all required elements for injunctive relief, and defining the analysis as discretion exercised along a "single continuum", such that a "minimal showing on the merits is required even when the balance of harms tips decidedly toward the moving party. Conversely, at least a minimal tip in the balance of hardships must be found even when the strongest showing on the merits is made."]) We will apply these standards in evaluating this motion.
