Johnston v. City and County of Honolulu

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 14 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICHARD HENRY JOHNSTON, Jr., No. 25-3213 (email: LordIRunTooYou@gmail.com), D.C. No. 1:24-cv-00442-DKW-

WRP

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MEMORANDUM*

CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU; HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Derrick Kahala Watson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 19, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, HURWITZ, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Richard Henry Johnston, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction in his action alleging harassment, false arrest, and attempted false arrest by the Honolulu Police Department. We

*

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).

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion. Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Johnston’s motion for a preliminary injunction because Johnston failed to establish the requirements for such relief. See id. (explaining that a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, the balance of equities tips in his favor, and an injunction is in the public interest).

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

AFFIRMED.

2 25-3213