U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2002

Laparade v. Ivanova

Laparade v. Ivanova
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided May 15, 2002
36 F. App'x 259

Laparade v. Ivanova

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

These preliminary injunction appeals come to us for review under Ninth Circuit Rule 3-3. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and we affirm.

We subject a district court’s orders regarding preliminary injunctive relief only to limited review. Walczak v. EPL Prolong, Inc., 198 F.3d 725, 730 (9th Cir. 1999). Our review of an order regarding a preliminary injunction “is much more limited than review of an order involving a permanent injunction, where all conclusions of law are freely reviewable.” Id. A decision regarding a preliminary injunction is reviewed for abuse of discretion, which occurs only if the district court based its decision on either an erroneous legal standard or clearly erroneous factual findings. Id.

*260We cannot say that the district court abused its discretion here. We therefore affirm the district court’s orders granting the preliminary injunctions. Our disposition will affect the rights of the parties only until the district court renders final judgment. Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press International, 686 F.2d 750, 752 (9th Cir. 1982). All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.