NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 16 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KENNETH A. FRIEDMAN, No. 19-16136

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:17-cv-00433-MMD-

WGC v. NATHANIEL WOODS, Chief Psychologist MEMORANDUM* at NNCC; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees, and ISIDRO BACA, Warden; et al.,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Miranda M. Du, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 11, 2019** Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

Nevada state prisoner Kenneth A. Friedman appeals pro se from the district

*

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). court’s order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion. Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953, 958 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying a preliminary injunction because Friedman failed to establish a relationship between the requested injunctive relief and the underlying retaliation claims in the operative complaint. See Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen’s Med. Ctr., 810 F.3d 631, 636 (9th Cir. 2015) (absent a sufficient nexus between the claims raised in a motion for injunctive relief and the claims set forth in the underlying complaint, the district court lacks authority to grant the relief requested).

AFFIRMED.

2 19-16136