IDM Participating Income Co.—II v. IDM Participating Income Corp.

10 F. App'x 515
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMay 21, 2001
DocketNo. 01-55279; D.C. No. CV-00-12368-DT
StatusPublished

This text of 10 F. App'x 515 (IDM Participating Income Co.—II v. IDM Participating Income Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
IDM Participating Income Co.—II v. IDM Participating Income Corp., 10 F. App'x 515 (9th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM2

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

[516]*516Our inquiry is limited to whether the district court has abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction, or based its decision on an erroneous legal standard or on clearly erroneous findings of fact. Does 1-5 v. Chandler, 83 F.3d 1150, 1152 (9th Cir.1996).

The record before us shows that the district court did not rely upon an erroneous legal premise or abuse its discretion by issuing the preliminary injunction. Id.; see also Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press Int'l, Inc., 686 F.2d 750, 753 (9th Cir.1982) (stating legal standards governing issuance of preliminary injunction). Moreover, the court’s factual findings are not clearly erroneous. Chandler, 83 F.3d at 1152.

Accordingly, the district court’s order is

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 F. App'x 515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/idm-participating-income-coii-v-idm-participating-income-corp-ca9-2001.