Can a restraining order be amended so that the restraining order does not prohibit certain activities?

^4. For example, the defendant argued the statute could be interpreted so that "the restraining order must 'mirror' the 'harasses,' 'follows,' 'threat' language of subdivision (a). Or, it could be interpreted so that the order may proscribe some but not all of the behavior described in subdivision (a)." Basically, in arguing that there are many different interpretations of the statute, the defendant claimed he did not receive adequate notice of what conduct was prohibited. (People v. McClelland, supra, 42 Cal.App.4th at p. 151.)