Case Name: HASUNJUNG GENERAL FOOD CO., LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WOO JIN TRADING, INC., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-24
Citations: 88 F. App'x 215
Docket Number: No. 03-56907; D.C. No. CV-03-5150-WJR/SHS
Parties: HASUNJUNG GENERAL FOOD CO., LTD., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. WOO JIN TRADING, INC., Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before FERNANDEZ, W. FLETCHER, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 88
Pages: 215–215

Head Matter:
HASUNJUNG GENERAL FOOD CO., LTD., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. WOO JIN TRADING, INC., Defendant—Appellee.
No. 03-56907.
D.C. No. CV-03-5150-WJR/SHS.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 17, 2004.
Decided Feb. 24, 2004.
Mark L. Sutton, Park & Sutton LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
John James Aumer, Jeffrey S. Yong, Alexander & Yong, Christine Chong, Christine Chong Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, W. FLETCHER, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Hasunjung General Food Co., a Korean food manufacturer, appeals the district court's denial of its application for a preliminary injunction in its trademark infringement action against Woo Jin Trading, Inc., a manufacturer of kim chi. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). The appeal comes to this panel pursuant to 9th Cir. R. 3-3.
Our review of an order denying a preliminary injunction is "limited and deferential," Southwest Voter Registration Education Project v. Shelley, 344 F.3d 914, 918 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc), and the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Hasunjung failed to demonstrate sufficient likelihood of success on the merits in light of a hardships and public interest balance that favored Woo Jin Trading, see id. at 917-18. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order.
Our disposition of this appeal will affect the rights of the parties only until the district court renders judgment on the merits of the case, at which time the losing party may again appeal. See Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press Int'l, Inc., 686 F.2d 750, 753 (9th Cir.1982).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.