Well no.  The last sentence is correct but the rest isn't.

IF under an injunction bitfloor would be prohibited by law to make further repayment of any of its creditors.  However no injunction has been filed and certainly none is already enjoining bitfloor from resolving business debts in the manner it sees fit.  If Bitfloor is enjoined from making payments I am sure he will let creditors know via this site or forum.

I would question the probability of a BTC injunction being successful but I do concede that if a judge enjoined bitfloor from paying any of its creditors pending bankruptcy protection then you would be correct.

Well technically those with BTC (myself included) could SEEK an injunction.  It isn't that I don't care I just feel it has a 0.0% chance of being successful.  A sought but unsuccessful injunction would not provide any relief.

Injunctions are only granted where "no relief under the law" is possible.  Even if the claim otherwise had merit (which it probably doesn't) it would not be possible to show that their is no other "relief under the law".

For example if someone is going to tear down a historical building getting an injunction is viable because dollars can't compensate for the loss of the historical building if later the plaintiffs win in court.  The burden for injunctions are high as due to their time sensitive nature, they preempt the other business of the court.