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