U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2011

Contest Promotions, LLC v. City and County of San Francis

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 27, 2011 · Rymer, Thomas, Paez

429 F. App'x 669

Counsel

Matthew David Hinks, Esquire, Amy Lerner Hill, Esquire, Senior Litigation, Benjamin M. Reznik, Esquire, Jeffer Man-gels Butler & Mitchell LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Thomas S. Lakritz, Esquire, Dennis J. Herrera, City, Victoria Wong, Kristen Ann Jensen, Esquire, Deputy City, City Attorney’s Office of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Contest Promotions v. City and County of San Francisco CA1/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

*670 MEMORANDUM **

The City and County of San Francisco appeals the district court’s order granting preliminary injunctive relief in favor of Contest Promotions, LLC. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and we affirm.

Our sole inquiry is whether the district court abused its discretion in granting preliminary injunctive relief. The Lands Council v. McNair, 537 F.3d 981, 986 (9th Cir. 2008); see Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 129 S.Ct. 365, 374, 172 L.Ed.2d 249 (2008) (listing factors for district court to consider); Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press Int’l., 686 F.2d 750, 752-53 (9th Cir. 1982) (explaining limited scope of review). We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order granting injunctive relief in favor of Contest Promotions, LLC.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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