United States v. 475 Martin Lane, Beverly Hills

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit November 27, 2012

United States v. 475 Martin Lane, Beverly Hills, 488 F. App'x 272 (9th Cir. 2012)

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Optional Capital, Inc. (“Optiona”) contends that the district court abused its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction preventing it from levying on the properties involved in this case. We disagree. The district court rightly found that there were serious questions going to the merits and that the balance of hardships tilted strongly against Optional. Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1131 (9th Cir. 2011).

This court does not have jurisdiction at this time to review the district court’s interlocutory order on lien priorities because it is not “inextricably intertwined” with the preliminary injunction. Hendricks v. Bank of Am., N.A., 408 F.3d 1127, 1134 (9th Cir. 2005).

Appellee’s motions to strike are denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.

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

Reference

Full Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, and Christopher Kim, AKA Chris Kim, AKA KJ Kim, AKA Kyung Joon Kim; Et Al., Claimant-Appellee, Eric Honig; Et Al., Intervenor-Appellees, v. 475 MARTIN LANE, BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA, Real Property Located At, Defendant, Optional Capital, Inc., AKA Optional Ventures, Claimant-Appellant
Status: Unpublished