The opinion
LUMBARD, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
For the reasons set forth in Judge Sugarman’s opinion, 136 F.Supp. 850 and on the authority of Blackmar v. Guerre, 1952, 342 U.S. 512 , 72 S.Ct. 410 , 96 L. Ed. 534 ; Burns v. McCrary, 2 Cir., 1956, 229 F.2d 286 ; Reeber v. Rossell, 2 Cir., 1952, 200 F.2d 334 ; Marshall v. Wyman, *140 D.C.N.D.Cal.1955, 132 F.Supp. 169 ; Harris v. Bayer, D.C.E.D.Pa.1955, 18 F. R.D. 392.; cf. United States ex rel. Vassel v. Duming, 2 Cir., 1945, 152 F.2d 455 , the order of the District Court denying appellant’s motion for a temporary injunction and the order of the District Court granting respondents’ cross-motion to dismiss the complaint should be affirmed.
I refrain from concurring in Judge FRANK’S discussion of other matters as it seems to me that such discussion is not necessary to the decision and regards matters concerning which I do not feel that the Court is or needs to be fully informed.