Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-15-01952/USCOURTS-ca8-15-01952-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-1952

___________________________

Vivek Shah

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Charles E. Samuels, Jr., D.S.C.C. Administrator, sued in his official capacity;

United States of America; Jose A. Santana, DSCC Administrator (originally

named as Doe)

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

____________

 Submitted: August 13, 2015

Filed: August 18, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 15-1952 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2015 Entry ID: 4306851 
In this interlocutory appeal in a pro se action under Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), federal inmate

Vivek Shah challenges the district court’s denials of preliminary injunctive relief. 1

After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we

conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying injunctive

relief, because Shah did not show a clear threat of irreparable harm. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292(a)(1)(appellate jurisdiction); H&R Block Tax.Servs.LLC v.Acevedo-Lopez,

742 F.3d 1074, 1077 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard of review); Dataphase Sys., Inc. v.

C.L. Sys., Inc., 640 F.2d 109, 113 (8th Cir. 1981) (en banc) (setting forth relevant

factors to be considered in determining whether preliminary injunction should issue). 

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The Honorable Jerome T. Kearney, United States Magistrate Judge for the

1

Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

Appellate Case: 15-1952 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2015 Entry ID: 4306851