Rivera v. City of San Rafael

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: January 28, 2025
• Docket: 24-5524
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 28 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARK RIVERA, No. 24-5524 D.C. No. 4:24-cv-05239-YGR Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM* CITY OF SAN RAFAEL; ANDREW URTON; CRISTINE ALILOVICH; CHRIS HESS; JOHN STEFANSKI,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 22, 2025**

Before: CLIFTON, CALLAHAN, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Mark Rivera appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his

motion for a preliminary injunction in his action alleging various federal and state

law claims concerning his threatened eviction from certain public property. 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 Rivera’s motion for

a preliminary injunction because Rivera 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).

AFFIRMED.

2 24-5524