NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 13 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANTHONY L. RODRIGUES, No. 17-17346 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-08272-DGC- ESW v. CHARLES L. RYAN, Warden, Director, MEMORANDUM* State of Arizona Dept. of Corrections; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 11, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Anthony L. Rodrigues appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims arising from a prison riot. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). for an abuse of discretion. Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen’s Med. Ctr., 810 F.3d 631, 635 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Rodrigues’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief because Rodrigues failed to establish “a sufficient nexus between the claims raised in [his] motion for injunctive relief and the claims set forth in the underlying complaint.” Id. at 636; see also Winter v. Nat. Res. Def.

Council, 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008) (setting forth standard for issuance of preliminary injunction).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 17-17346