Christopher Krause, a pro se plaintiff, challenged the California Contractors State License Board's suspension of his license in 2015, which he claims was based on a "false investigation and administrative hearing with improper process." Krause sought to enjoin the CSLB from maintaining his license suspension and publishing disciplinary disclosures on its public website related to June 2012 bond payouts.
U.S. District Judge Hernán D. Vera found that Krause failed to meet the heightened standard for a mandatory injunction, which requires that "the law and facts clearly favor" the moving party's position. The judge noted that "Plaintiff has not made a clear showing supported by admissible evidence that the administrative hearing violated due process," echoing his reasoning from denying Krause's previous requests for temporary restraining orders in December 2025 and January 2026.
Krause filed his lawsuit on December 30, 2025, bringing claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for procedural and substantive due process violations against the CSLB and individuals Stephen P. Sands and Maury Estabrooks. The contractor argued that continued public display of the disciplinary action was causing him "immediate and ongoing irreparable harm."
The ruling marks the third time Judge Vera has rejected Krause's attempts to obtain emergency relief in the case. The decision highlights the difficulty pro se plaintiffs face in challenging administrative disciplinary actions, particularly when seeking the "extraordinary and drastic remedy" of injunctive relief against state licensing boards.